> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Michael Letterle > Sent: Thursday, 14 February 2008 11:03 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] Initializing external Ruby libraries > > What do you see would be the advantage of something like this > as opposed to the current method of loading .NET assemblies? > I mean you could use something like OpenSSL.NET > (http://openssl-net.sourceforge.net/) today to implement ssl > in IronRuby for example
It's not just about getting access to some implementation of OpenSSL, it about providing a set of Ruby classes and methods that exactly match those exposed by existing Ruby extension libraries used by CRuby. By explicitly calling define_class, define_method etc, you have better control over how your C# code is presented to the Ruby world. You can, for example, specify a Ruby base class that may not exist as a static .NET class. I'm not sure if this is actually an issue in practice. But then if there's no need to call define_class and define_method explicitly for external libraries, then why do it for the built-in classes? Why not simply load an RubyExternalLibrary.dll? Is it for performance, for preciseness of interface or both? Cheers, Wayne. _______________________________________________ Ironruby-core mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
