I thought that the general idea in Ruby circles was that all their libraries should be written in Ruby unless there was some important reason not to, such as performance or access to underlying OS or hardware functionality that was not available to Ruby code?
The Rubinius guys took this one step further and have pretty much implemented everything in Ruby (including the runtime engine itself) and where they needed to access the OS directly they have created hooks into the operating system via "special" Rubinius operations that allow the ruby code to do the stuff. Interestingly, they then run into the problem of people monkey patching their runtime engine by accident, which is what happened when you required the math library which changed the way division works in integers and this broke their implementation of indexing arrays. If the DLR is going to compile up the Ruby code into IL anyway then it should not be a huge performance problem to write most libraries in Ruby and then use IR .NET interop to access any underlying functionality that is not normally available in Ruby. **** This would also have the benefit of removing the excuse of non-C# developers from contributing to the IR libraries!! **** Pete -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sanghyeon Seo > P.S. I notice your module is implemented in Python - I hadn't even contemplated the idea of implementing these libraries in Ruby - I guess because I'm a C# developer. Do people think we should rewrite these extension libraries in Ruby? Writing in Ruby does simplify some boilerplates code, doesn't it? -- Seo Sanghyeon _______________________________________________ Ironruby-core mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
