|.NET compiler email@example.com (ajk) (2008-09-15)|
|.NET compiler firstname.lastname@example.org (Felipe Angriman) (2008-09-16)|
|Re: .NET compiler email@example.com (Stephen Horne) (2008-09-16)|
|Re: .NET compiler firstname.lastname@example.org (Aaron Gray) (2008-09-18)|
|From:||Stephen Horne <email@example.com>|
|Date:||Tue, 16 Sep 2008 23:36:22 +0100|
|Posted-Date:||17 Sep 2008 07:58:01 EDT|
On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 18:14:02 -0700 (PDT), ajk <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>If I was contemplating doing a .NET compiler for a language, would it
>be better to generate ILAsm or some other higher-level .NET language?
One of the major features of .NET is supposed to be interoperability
between languages. This gives a third option - mix and match. Choose
an existing .NET HLL that provides a reasonable target model for your
core language features (probably C#, but the new Objective CAML based
F# may well be worth a serious look), and generate IL (or some other
..NET language) for any features that don't easily fit.
My guess is that you'll rarely need IL - but "need" is of course only
one reason for using it.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.