On 02/20/06 Raja R Harinath wrote: > I agree. They're probably not related. However, I couldn't even > configure the nemerle tree since it complains about invalid IL in the > bootstrap compiler. > > The IL looks like: > > IL_04bd: call !!0 class > [Nemerle]Nemerle.Core.Option::UnSome<valuetype > [Nemerle]Nemerle.Builtins.Tuple`2<class [Nemerle]Nemerle.Core.list`1<class > Nemerle.Compiler.TyVar>,class Nemerle.Compiler.TyVar>> (class > [Nemerle]Nemerle.Core.option`1<!!0>) > IL_04c2: ldfld !0 valuetype [Nemerle]Nemerle.Builtins.Tuple`2<class > [Nemerle]Nemerle.Core.list`1<class Nemerle.Compiler.TyVar>,class > Nemerle.Compiler.TyVar>::field0 > > The 'call' puts a valuetype on the stack, which mono's il-verifier for > 'ldfld' doesn't like. The ECMA 335 April 2005 draft says that it should > be allowed -- maybe this is a change from the older ECMA standard?
This is already fixed in svn. lupus -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- [EMAIL PROTECTED] debian/rules [EMAIL PROTECTED] Monkeys do it better _______________________________________________ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
