My point wasn't that one needs to have access to the DLR code. It was that because IronRuby is so tightly coupled to DLR at the moment, it is not possible to remove its tethers and let it free as a proper OSS. Pete
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sanghyeon Seo Sent: Tuesday,29 April 29, 2008 06:23 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] Regarding IronRuby... How true it sounds from this blog 2008/4/29 Peter Bacon Darwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I believe one of the key problems is the DLR. As I understand, it MS makes > a distinction between "important" stuff (i.e. the DLR) and "peripheral" > stuff (i.e. IronXxxx). MS wants to have complete control over the DLR and > is not interested in making it Open Source. Rather the DLR code is just > community viewable, much like the rest of the .NET framework code. I can > understand this since core .NET Framework code is central to the MS strategy > and they don't want things sneaking in the sides. I disagree. I think DLR is a non-problem. Reality check: do you have any change in your mind you would like to make to DLR? For example, (sorry for using CPython as an example; I am not familiar with Ruby world) many people contributes to CPython runtime without touching CPython's custom memory allocator. Still many people contributes to CPython standard library and C extensions without touching CPython runtime. -- Seo Sanghyeon _______________________________________________ Ironruby-core mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core _______________________________________________ Ironruby-core mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
