From: Wayne Vucenic <nightphotos@...>
Date: 2005-12-04T08:49:55+09:00
Subject: Re: IL Generator syntax proposal

Hi John,

It was great meeting you at RubyConf!

We can avoid having to do all the "g." prefixes on the methods like this:

module CLR_IL
  def use_generator(g)
    @il_generator = g
  end

  def begin_exception_block
    @il_generator.begin_exception_block
  end

  def call(s)
    @il_generator.call(s)
  end
end

then your example becomes

  d = DynamicMethod.new("Int32, UInt32*, UInt32")
  g = d.get_generator
  use_generator(g)

  begin_exception_block do
    call "static Throws.ThrowException()"
    br_s "EndOfMethod"
  ...etc...

Of course, we could use method_missing in module CLR_IL to avoid
having to write each of the individual wrappers that forward to
@il_generator.whatever.

Wayne Vucenic
No Bugs Software
"Ruby and C++ Agile Contract Programming in Silicon Valley"


On 12/2/05, John Lam <drjflam@gmail.com> wrote:
> In my rewrite of my Ruby <=> 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 the
> syntax for an IL generator should look like, and this was what I came up
> with:
>
> d = DynamicMethod.new("Int32, UInt32*, UInt32")
> g = 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 ...
>
> Thanks!
> -John
> http://www.iunknown.com
>
>