From: ptkwt@... (Phil Tomson)
Date: 2005-12-03T11:32:31+09:00
Subject: Re: IL Generator syntax proposal

In article <d0b50b7f0512020916h6a4211fj437c5e0ca329c19@mail.gmail.com>,
John Lam  <drjflam@gmail.com> wrote:
>------=_Part_949_1409715.1133543816267
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>Content-Disposition: inline
>
>In my rewrite of my Ruby <=3D> CLR bridge, I've been thinking about pushing
>most of the logic into Ruby, and leaving as little as possible in Managed
>C++. I was just hacking around this morning in emacs thinking about what th=
>e
>syntax for an IL generator should look like, and this was what I came up
>with:
>
>d =3D DynamicMethod.new("Int32, UInt32*, UInt32")
>g =3D d.get_generator
>
>g.begin_exception_block do
>  g.call "static Throws.ThrowException()"
>  g.br_s "EndOfMethod"
>  g.catch("Exception") do
>    g.call "ToString()"
>    g.call "static Console.WriteLine(String)"
>  end
>  g.label "EndOfMethod"
>  g.ldc_i4 Qnil
>  g.ret
>end
>
>I'd love it if folks could comment on how this syntax might be improved in
>Ruby before I crank out the underlying MC++ / Ruby code ...
>

Are you the person who got the Google summer of code grant to do a Ruby/.NET 
bridge? 

Phil