Re: .NET compiler

"Aaron Gray" <ang.usenet@gmail.com>
Thu, 18 Sep 2008 21:42:35 +0100

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
.NET compiler anders43@gmail.com (ajk) (2008-09-15)
.NET compiler felipeangriman@gmail.com (Felipe Angriman) (2008-09-16)
Re: .NET compiler sh006d3592@blueyonder.co.uk (Stephen Horne) (2008-09-16)
Re: .NET compiler ang.usenet@gmail.com (Aaron Gray) (2008-09-18)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "Aaron Gray" <ang.usenet@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 21:42:35 +0100
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 08-09-070
Keywords: code
Posted-Date: 18 Sep 2008 18:09:13 EDT

"ajk" <anders43@gmail.com> wrote in message news:08-09-070@comp.compilers...
> 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?
>
> By creating ILAsm there is more control but I suppose one would have
> to put more effort in optimisation. Round-tripping would also work.
> Any other benefits of doing ILAsm compared to say C# and then
> compiling C# using the std compiler?


If your language is dynamic you may well want to consder the DLR as
developed with Iron Ruby and Iron Python.


Aaron


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.