On 07/23/02 Serge Lidin wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeroen Frijters [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] [...] > It might be good idea to port ILASM to C#... ;-) > > > Anyway, I'd rather port it to ILAsm. Why add C# constraints i > > to those of the managed code in general?
A point could be: if you _can_ implement ilasm/ildasm using Reflection and Reflection.Emit it means that those interfaces are complete and the compiler writers that use Reflection would be very happy:-) So we would be equally happy with a IL version or a C# version of ilasm, as long as it uses Reflection and Reflection.Emit:-) lupus -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- [EMAIL PROTECTED] debian/rules [EMAIL PROTECTED] Monkeys do it better You can read messages from the Advanced DOTNET archive, unsubscribe from Advanced DOTNET, or subscribe to other DevelopMentor lists at http://discuss.develop.com.
