While reflection was there one thing that was missing is good dynamic code generation support. We got that in v2.0 in the form of DynamicMethods. That lets us spin up little snippets of code that are fully collectible by the GC so it really enables a lot of scenarios that were difficult or painful before (and interesting enough one impetus for that was SQL server - not exactly what you think of when you think dynamic languages :)).
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Curt Hagenlocher Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 6:05 AM To: Discussion of IronPython Subject: Re: [IronPython] dynamic languages and .net 1.0 On 10/24/07, David Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: A small question. I assume .net support for dynamic languages, interpreters, reflection was not in .net 1.0. Microsoft started as a compiler company and I thought Bill Gates was strongly in favor of interpreted languages. I thought it was odd that Microsoft apparently did not supply interpreted languages in .net 1.0. Is this because "reflection?" was more difficult to implement or were interpreters a lower priority? Reflection was fully baked in the initial release of .NET. Microsoft is pretty good at implementing what its customers are asking for, though obviously they can't achieve instant turnaround. Don't be misled by the current popularity of dynamic languages; when the CLR was being designed ten years ago, it's likely that none of Microsoft's customers was asking for them. -- Curt Hagenlocher [EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
