Re: [IronPython] IronPython for Silverlight 5?
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:14 PM, Chad Brockman cha...@slb.com wrote: I see Silverlight 5 now has something besides simple reflection (ICustomTypeProvider) - http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg986857(v=VS.96).aspx#data Will we see an update to Iron*/DLR to support binding to dynamic objects any time soon? This will open fantastic options for using IronPython in Silverlight. If someone provides a patch, yes. We actually need someone with an interest in Silverlight to keep an eye on it and make sure that we don't break SL support and new features like this. We don't have anyone in that role right now. - Jeff ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
Re: [IronPython] IronPython for Silverlight 5?
Jeff wrote: On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:14 PM, Chad Brockman cha...@slb.com wrote: I see Silverlight 5 now has something besides simple reflection (ICustomTypeProvider) - http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg986857(v=VS.96).aspx#data Will we see an update to Iron*/DLR to support binding to dynamic objects any time soon? This will open fantastic options for using IronPython in Silverlight. If someone provides a patch, yes. We actually need someone with an interest in Silverlight to keep an eye on it and make sure that we don't break SL support and new features like this. We don't have anyone in that role right now. If anyone's interested on working on this it'd probably mean adding an implementation of this onto OldInstance as well as adding it onto our new-style instances whose classes are created by NewTypeMaker. Adding the interface is probably pretty easy, making it return useful things may be a little more difficult. I'm a little surprised they didn't go with the already existing ICustomTypeDescriptor. ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
Re: [IronPython] IronPython for Silverlight 5?
After looking into what it takes to implement ICustomTypeProvider it seems like it would be a nightmare for dynamic object support. You have to produce actual custom Type instances, presumably using TypeBuilder and emitting IL opcodes to handle the getter/setter accessors. If the databinding system caches those dynamically-created Types then it could cause problems because what happens when we add a new member via expando after binding once (or remove one that previously existed)? But if they don't cache the Type objects then it seems like the overhead might be absurd from constructing these things again and again (and you can't use TypeBuilder without first creating a dynamic assembly and module). I really hope they alter course and go with ICustomTypeDescriptor instead (or even IDynamicMetaObjectProvider if that is feasible). I really don't understand how they expect the current system to work for dynamic properties because there is nothing dynamic at all about a System.Type instance. The best it can hope to be is a snapshot of the metadata from a dynamic object as of some point in time. Keith Rome Senior Consultant and Architect MCPD-EAD, MCSD, MCDBA, MCTS-WPF, MCTS-TFS, MCTS-WSS Wintellect | 770.617.4016 | kr...@wintellect.com www.wintellect.com -Original Message- From: users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com [mailto:users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Hardy Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 4:11 PM To: Discussion of IronPython Cc: Chad Brockman Subject: Re: [IronPython] IronPython for Silverlight 5? On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:03 AM, Dino Viehland di...@microsoft.com wrote: Jeff wrote: On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:14 PM, Chad Brockman cha...@slb.com wrote: I see Silverlight 5 now has something besides simple reflection (ICustomTypeProvider) - http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg986857(v=VS.96).aspx#data Will we see an update to Iron*/DLR to support binding to dynamic objects any time soon? This will open fantastic options for using IronPython in Silverlight. If someone provides a patch, yes. We actually need someone with an interest in Silverlight to keep an eye on it and make sure that we don't break SL support and new features like this. We don't have anyone in that role right now. If anyone's interested on working on this it'd probably mean adding an implementation of this onto OldInstance as well as adding it onto our new-style instances whose classes are created by NewTypeMaker. Adding the interface is probably pretty easy, making it return useful things may be a little more difficult. I'm a little surprised they didn't go with the already existing ICustomTypeDescriptor. Are you really surprised? :) It is still in Beta. Maybe there's a slight chance their minds could be changed? I'm guessing they don't have the rest of System.ComponentModel either, so they didn't want to add just one interface. - Jeff ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
Re: [IronPython] IronPython for Silverlight 5?
Couldn't you just subclass Type? It's methods are virtual and can be overridden. I don't think you need to emit a real RuntimeType. Tomas -Original Message- From: users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com [mailto:users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com] On Behalf Of Keith Rome Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 3:30 PM To: Discussion of IronPython Subject: Re: [IronPython] IronPython for Silverlight 5? After looking into what it takes to implement ICustomTypeProvider it seems like it would be a nightmare for dynamic object support. You have to produce actual custom Type instances, presumably using TypeBuilder and emitting IL opcodes to handle the getter/setter accessors. If the databinding system caches those dynamically-created Types then it could cause problems because what happens when we add a new member via expando after binding once (or remove one that previously existed)? But if they don't cache the Type objects then it seems like the overhead might be absurd from constructing these things again and again (and you can't use TypeBuilder without first creating a dynamic assembly and module). I really hope they alter course and go with ICustomTypeDescriptor instead (or even IDynamicMetaObjectProvider if that is feasible). I really don't understand how they expect the current system to work for dynamic properties because there is nothing dynamic at all about a System.Type instance. The best it can hope to be is a snapshot of the metadata from a dynamic object as of some point in time. Keith Rome Senior Consultant and Architect MCPD-EAD, MCSD, MCDBA, MCTS-WPF, MCTS-TFS, MCTS-WSS Wintellect | 770.617.4016 | kr...@wintellect.com www.wintellect.com -Original Message- From: users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com [mailto:users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Hardy Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 4:11 PM To: Discussion of IronPython Cc: Chad Brockman Subject: Re: [IronPython] IronPython for Silverlight 5? On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:03 AM, Dino Viehland di...@microsoft.com wrote: Jeff wrote: On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:14 PM, Chad Brockman cha...@slb.com wrote: I see Silverlight 5 now has something besides simple reflection (ICustomTypeProvider) - http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg986857(v=VS.96).aspx#data Will we see an update to Iron*/DLR to support binding to dynamic objects any time soon? This will open fantastic options for using IronPython in Silverlight. If someone provides a patch, yes. We actually need someone with an interest in Silverlight to keep an eye on it and make sure that we don't break SL support and new features like this. We don't have anyone in that role right now. If anyone's interested on working on this it'd probably mean adding an implementation of this onto OldInstance as well as adding it onto our new-style instances whose classes are created by NewTypeMaker. Adding the interface is probably pretty easy, making it return useful things may be a little more difficult. I'm a little surprised they didn't go with the already existing ICustomTypeDescriptor. Are you really surprised? :) It is still in Beta. Maybe there's a slight chance their minds could be changed? I'm guessing they don't have the rest of System.ComponentModel either, so they didn't want to add just one interface. - Jeff ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
Re: [IronPython] IronPython for Silverlight 5?
The docs for System.Type claims that you cannot subclass from it in Silverlight. Is this being relaxed in v5? Keith Rome Senior Consultant and Architect MCPD-EAD, MCSD, MCDBA, MCTS-WPF, MCTS-TFS, MCTS-WSS Wintellect | 770.617.4016 | kr...@wintellect.com www.wintellect.com On Apr 14, 2011, at 6:49 PM, Tomas Matousek tomas.matou...@microsoft.com wrote: Couldn't you just subclass Type? It's methods are virtual and can be overridden. I don't think you need to emit a real RuntimeType. Tomas -Original Message- From: users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com [mailto:users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com] On Behalf Of Keith Rome Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 3:30 PM To: Discussion of IronPython Subject: Re: [IronPython] IronPython for Silverlight 5? After looking into what it takes to implement ICustomTypeProvider it seems like it would be a nightmare for dynamic object support. You have to produce actual custom Type instances, presumably using TypeBuilder and emitting IL opcodes to handle the getter/setter accessors. If the databinding system caches those dynamically-created Types then it could cause problems because what happens when we add a new member via expando after binding once (or remove one that previously existed)? But if they don't cache the Type objects then it seems like the overhead might be absurd from constructing these things again and again (and you can't use TypeBuilder without first creating a dynamic assembly and module). I really hope they alter course and go with ICustomTypeDescriptor instead (or even IDynamicMetaObjectProvider if that is feasible). I really don't understand how they expect the current system to work for dynamic properties because there is nothing dynamic at all about a System.Type instance. The best it can hope to be is a snapshot of the metadata from a dynamic object as of some point in time. Keith Rome Senior Consultant and Architect MCPD-EAD, MCSD, MCDBA, MCTS-WPF, MCTS-TFS, MCTS-WSS Wintellect | 770.617.4016 | kr...@wintellect.com www.wintellect.com -Original Message- From: users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com [mailto:users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Hardy Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 4:11 PM To: Discussion of IronPython Cc: Chad Brockman Subject: Re: [IronPython] IronPython for Silverlight 5? On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:03 AM, Dino Viehland di...@microsoft.com wrote: Jeff wrote: On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:14 PM, Chad Brockman cha...@slb.com wrote: I see Silverlight 5 now has something besides simple reflection (ICustomTypeProvider) - http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg986857(v=VS.96).aspx#data Will we see an update to Iron*/DLR to support binding to dynamic objects any time soon? This will open fantastic options for using IronPython in Silverlight. If someone provides a patch, yes. We actually need someone with an interest in Silverlight to keep an eye on it and make sure that we don't break SL support and new features like this. We don't have anyone in that role right now. If anyone's interested on working on this it'd probably mean adding an implementation of this onto OldInstance as well as adding it onto our new-style instances whose classes are created by NewTypeMaker. Adding the interface is probably pretty easy, making it return useful things may be a little more difficult. I'm a little surprised they didn't go with the already existing ICustomTypeDescriptor. Are you really surprised? :) It is still in Beta. Maybe there's a slight chance their minds could be changed? I'm guessing they don't have the rest of System.ComponentModel either, so they didn't want to add just one interface. - Jeff ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
Re: [IronPython] IronPython for Silverlight 5?
I think this should be possible in SL4 already:
public abstract class Type : MemberInfo, _Type, IReflect
{
[SecuritySafeCritical]
internal protected Type();
}
There seems to be nothing that would prevent from doing so.
Tomas
-Original Message-
From: users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com
[mailto:users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com] On Behalf Of Keith Rome
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 4:15 PM
To: Discussion of IronPython
Cc: Discussion of IronPython
Subject: Re: [IronPython] IronPython for Silverlight 5?
The docs for System.Type claims that you cannot subclass from it in
Silverlight. Is this being relaxed in v5?
Keith Rome
Senior Consultant and Architect
MCPD-EAD, MCSD, MCDBA, MCTS-WPF, MCTS-TFS, MCTS-WSS
Wintellect | 770.617.4016 | kr...@wintellect.com
www.wintellect.com
On Apr 14, 2011, at 6:49 PM, Tomas Matousek tomas.matou...@microsoft.com
wrote:
Couldn't you just subclass Type? It's methods are virtual and can be
overridden. I don't think you need to emit a real RuntimeType.
Tomas
-Original Message-
From: users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com
[mailto:users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com] On Behalf Of Keith Rome
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 3:30 PM
To: Discussion of IronPython
Subject: Re: [IronPython] IronPython for Silverlight 5?
After looking into what it takes to implement ICustomTypeProvider it seems
like it would be a nightmare for dynamic object support. You have to produce
actual custom Type instances, presumably using TypeBuilder and emitting IL
opcodes to handle the getter/setter accessors. If the databinding system
caches those dynamically-created Types then it could cause problems because
what happens when we add a new member via expando after binding once (or
remove one that previously existed)? But if they don't cache the Type objects
then it seems like the overhead might be absurd from constructing these
things again and again (and you can't use TypeBuilder without first creating
a dynamic assembly and module).
I really hope they alter course and go with ICustomTypeDescriptor instead (or
even IDynamicMetaObjectProvider if that is feasible). I really don't
understand how they expect the current system to work for dynamic
properties because there is nothing dynamic at all about a System.Type
instance. The best it can hope to be is a snapshot of the metadata from a
dynamic object as of some point in time.
Keith Rome
Senior Consultant and Architect
MCPD-EAD, MCSD, MCDBA, MCTS-WPF, MCTS-TFS, MCTS-WSS Wintellect |
770.617.4016 | kr...@wintellect.com www.wintellect.com
-Original Message-
From: users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com
[mailto:users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Hardy
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 4:11 PM
To: Discussion of IronPython
Cc: Chad Brockman
Subject: Re: [IronPython] IronPython for Silverlight 5?
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:03 AM, Dino Viehland di...@microsoft.com wrote:
Jeff wrote:
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:14 PM, Chad Brockman cha...@slb.com
wrote:
I see Silverlight 5 now has something besides simple reflection
(ICustomTypeProvider) -
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg986857(v=VS.96).aspx#data
Will we see an update to Iron*/DLR to support binding to dynamic
objects any time soon? This will open fantastic options for using
IronPython in Silverlight.
If someone provides a patch, yes.
We actually need someone with an interest in Silverlight to keep an
eye on it and make sure that we don't break SL support and new
features like this. We don't have anyone in that role right now.
If anyone's interested on working on this it'd probably mean adding
an implementation of this onto OldInstance as well as adding it onto
our new-style instances whose classes are created by NewTypeMaker.
Adding the interface is probably pretty easy, making it return useful things
may be a little more difficult.
I'm a little surprised they didn't go with the already existing
ICustomTypeDescriptor.
Are you really surprised? :)
It is still in Beta. Maybe there's a slight chance their minds could be
changed? I'm guessing they don't have the rest of System.ComponentModel
either, so they didn't want to add just one interface.
- Jeff
___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.ironpython.com
http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.ironpython.com
http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.ironpython.com
http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.ironpython.com
http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
