From: Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
Date: 2000-12-22T04:58:46+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:7906] Ruby on .NET? A Perl Experience


Slashdot just referenced the following note from Nathan Torkington
about .NET (http://www.perl.com/pub/2000/12/net.html?wwwrrr_rss) which
in turn references a project at ActiveState which has an experimental
compiler already running (http://www.activestate.com/Products/NET/Perl.html).

It works, but there are issues. An extract from the page reads:


  Alternate approach to running Perl on .NET

     Compiling Perl to native .NET code has several inherent limitations:

     - Due to the enforced strong typing of the .NET environment the
       code runs slower than traditional Perl.

     - All extension modules containing XS code are not available in
       the .NET environment.

     - The compiler cannot be re-entered at runtime: string eval and
       runtime require cannot be supported in this implementation.

  ActiveState will provide an alternate solution to make legacy Perl
  code available from within the .NET Framework. A new component of
  the Perl Dev Kit will allow programmers to create a stub proxy
  object within the .NET Framework, but with the actual code running
  outside .NET using the traditional Perl interpreter. Method calls
  and property accesses will be marshaled semi-transparently across
  this boundary.

                         Copyright 1996-2000, ActiveState Tool Corp.


So, stuff to think about. .NET compatibility may get to be a big deal, 
and Ruby might get hurt without it. At the same time, it doesn't sound 
like an ideal environment for a dynamic language.


Dave