ent: Friday, September 05, 2008 2:21 PM
To: Dino Viehland; 'Discussion of IronPython'; 'Curt Hagenlocher'
Cc: 'IronRuby'
Subject: RE: [IronPython] -X:SaveAssemblies
Okay, understood, although I'd think the DLR could just create an abstract
base class with vari
is capacity.
Thanks!
-Original Message-
From: Dino Viehland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 5:18 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Discussion of IronPython; 'Curt Hagenlocher'
Cc: 'IronRuby'
Subject: RE: [IronPython] -X:SaveAssemblies
The big reason the DLR
ronRuby'; 'Discussion of IronPython'
Subject: Re: [IronPython] -X:SaveAssemblies
>>
>> Okay, but my question still stands of whether or not part or all of the
>> function of pyc.py should be moved into the DLR (obviously with some
>virtual
>> methods for imp
>>
>> Okay, but my question still stands of whether or not part or all of the
>> function of pyc.py should be moved into the DLR (obviously with some
>virtual
>> methods for implementers)?
>
> The bulk of the compiler code is actually in the DLR and in IronPython
> itself. pyc.py is a user-friendl
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 1:18 PM, KE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> -X:SaveAssemblies is for debugging purposes and does not produce
>> output equivalent to that produced by pyc.py.
>
> Okay, but my question still stands of whether or not part or all of the
> function of pyc.py should be moved into th
> -X:SaveAssemblies is for debugging purposes and does not produce
> output equivalent to that produced by pyc.py.
Okay, but my question still stands of whether or not part or all of the
function of pyc.py should be moved into the DLR (obviously with some virtual
methods for implementers)?
Thanks
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 11:00 AM, KE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I find it odd that the ConsoleOptions class only has a single FileName
> string property. This forces the creation of pyc.py for creating a DLL with
> one or more files to compile, whereas I believe the functionality in pyc.py
Just to add, here are some problems with the pyc.py approach rather than
putting this logic into the DLR/DLR-implementor:
1. Worse performance since the file needs to be compiled and run
2. The pyc.py file itself is required to move around with the other
libraries when distributing a DLR-based run
Hi,
I find it odd that the ConsoleOptions class only has a single FileName
string property. This forces the creation of pyc.py for creating a DLL with
one or more files to compile, whereas I believe the functionality in pyc.py
of creating a DLL from one or more input files should be right in the D
ng that yet. You're not the only
one that wants it though so it's hard to imagine we can completely ignore it.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lee Culver
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 1:54 PM
To: Users@lists.ironpython.com
Subject: [IronPython
I use the -X:SaveAssemblies command to compile and pass around tools that I
create with IronPython... I've noticed that it fails on 2.0A6. Specifically,
the exe that it generates gives an "invalid executable" dialog box in windows
(with the 3 dlls in the same directory as the .exe file). Is t
11 matches
Mail list logo
