holger krekel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Re-Hi! > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 21:53 +0100, Armin Rigo wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 09:43:26PM +0100, holger krekel wrote: >> > Good point which i indeed had forgotten about. Also regarding GCs >> > it is higher level than C. So probably we need oo + part-of-lltypes :) >> >> You keep inserting lltype here -- probably just out of our >> well-established habit of loving confusion :-) ootype contains >> lltype-ish aspects of its own, because all OO target languages that we >> have in mind need these aspects. There is nothing special about IL -- >> certainly not anything that would make it different than C#, as far as I >> can tell. > > didn't intend to doubt the latter. But I guess i need to > refresh/improve my knowledge of ootypes.
A particular, relevant fact here is that the ootypesystem and the lltypesystem are not disjoint -- they share at least the Primitives, which is to say the representations of integers, floats, etc. Cheers, mwh -- 112. Computer Science is embarrassed by the computer. -- Alan Perlis, http://www.cs.yale.edu/homes/perlis-alan/quotes.html _______________________________________________ [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
