[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Introspector & Treecc (was: [DotGNU]Licence question about GNU and G
From: |
Gopal.V |
Subject: |
Re: Introspector & Treecc (was: [DotGNU]Licence question about GNU and GCC) |
Date: |
Thu, 21 Mar 2002 15:57:00 +0530 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.2.5i |
If memory serves me right, Rhys Weatherley wrote:
> > I think the first step towards a CodeDom would be completing the
> > System.Reflection.Emit classes.
>
> System.CodeDom is part of the "System" assembly, but it
Well, I think Reflection is needed anyway (dependency) ?.
> Or just use Mono's implementation, as they already have it?
>
> I would consider it to be a "high-level library".
Yes, it would be wise to use it rather than duplicate it.
> already too many C# compilers - we don't need another.
two's company , three's a crowd ? (even for free C# compilers ?)
> Any volunteers to try to adapt the Mono implementation
> for use in pnetlib?
How and what parts ?.
Gopal.V
BTW: I'm working on HttpWebRequest class -- neither Mono or DotGNU
has that class. (reduce,reuse,recycle code !)
--
The difference between insanity and genius is only measured by success
//===<=>===\\
|| GNU RULEZ ||
\\===<=>===//
- Re: Introspector & Treecc (was: [DotGNU]Licence question about GNU and GCC), (continued)
- Re: Introspector & Treecc (was: [DotGNU]Licence question about GNU and GCC), Rhys Weatherley, 2002/03/14
- Re: Introspector & Treecc (was: [DotGNU]Licence question about GNU and GCC), James Michael DuPont, 2002/03/14
- Re: Introspector & Treecc (was: [DotGNU]Licence question about GNU and GCC), Rhys Weatherley, 2002/03/14
- Re: Introspector & Treecc (was: [DotGNU]Licence question about GNU and GCC), James Michael DuPont, 2002/03/15
- Re: Introspector & Treecc (was: [DotGNU]Licence question about GNU and GCC), Gopal.V, 2002/03/15
- Re: Introspector & Treecc (was: [DotGNU]Licence question about GNU and GCC), James Michael DuPont, 2002/03/15
- Re: Introspector & Treecc (was: [DotGNU]Licence question about GNU and GCC), James Michael DuPont, 2002/03/20
- Re: Introspector & Treecc (was: [DotGNU]Licence question about GNU and GCC), Gopal.V, 2002/03/20
- Re: Introspector & Treecc (was: [DotGNU]Licence question about GNU and GCC), Rhys Weatherley, 2002/03/20
- Re: Introspector & Treecc (was: [DotGNU]Licence question about GNU and GCC), James Michael DuPont, 2002/03/21
- Re: Introspector & Treecc (was: [DotGNU]Licence question about GNU and GCC),
Gopal.V <=
- OT: ilrun (was Re: [DotGNU]Introspector & Treecc), S11001001, 2002/03/14
- Re: [DotGNU]Licence question about GNU and GCC, James Michael DuPont, 2002/03/12
- Re: [DotGNU]Licence question about GNU and GCC, Norbert Bollow, 2002/03/12
- Re: [DotGNU]Licence question about GNU and GCC, Gopal.V, 2002/03/12
- Re: [DotGNU]Licence question about GNU and GCC, David Sugar, 2002/03/12
Re: [DotGNU]Licence question about GNU and GCC, S11001001, 2002/03/21