RE: [IronPython] IronPython 0.7.2 Released

Is the calling of overloaded operators implemented? (Mono 1.1.6 / Win32, Mapack imported) >>> a = Matrix(3,3) >>> a[0,0]=2.0 >>> a[0,1]=1.0 >>> a[0,2]=2.0 >>> a[1,0]=1.0 >>> a[1,1]=4.0 >>> a[1,2]=0.0 >>> a[2,0]=2.0 >>> a[2,1]=0.0 >>> a[2,2]=8.0 >>> a 2 1 2 1 4 0 2 0 8 >>> a.Inverse 0.8 -0.2 -0.2

RE: [IronPython] IronPython 0.7.2 Released

Same verified in MS beta: IronPython 0.7.2 on .NET 2.0.40607.42 Copyright (c) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. >>> import sys >>> sys.LoadAssemblyFromFile("Mapack.dll") >>> from Mapack import * >>> a = Matrix.Random(3,3) >>> a 0.805084117131813 0.256781293664491 0.696419091288195 0.9856

Re: [IronPython] IronPython, please?

csc = c# compiler vbc = vb.net compiler jsc = jscript compiler ipc = iron python compiler <<< Ab. On 4/10/05, Anthony Tarlano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Reginald, > > I second your thoughts.. Let's just name the IronPython(console) > python.net.exe and be done with the madness > > ;-) > > An

[IronPython] Re: IronPython License

FYI (I included users-ironpython.com@lists.ironpython.com into CC list but GMAIL somehow ingored it, so I am posting my respond to Jason here) -- Forwarded message -- From: a p <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Apr 13, 2005 5:55 AM Subject: Re: IronPython License To: Jason Matusow <[EMAIL

[IronPython] Re: IronPython License

> 12. And more... but I hope you got my (really people's) point. Don't > even think that you and your lawyers can outsmart entire mankind. now that's one constructive approach. sorry, "a p", but you and your mail strikes me as incredibly immature and totally unprofessional. what company did you

Re: [IronPython] IronPython, please?

> csc = c# compiler > vbc = vb.net compiler > jsc = jscript compiler > ipc = iron python compiler <<< > > Ab. Nice suggestion, but IronPython is not a compiler (yet?). Reginald ___ users-ironpython.com mailing list users-ironpython.com@lists.ironpyt

Re: [IronPython] Re: IronPython License

>> 12. And more... but I hope you got my (really people's) point. Don't >> even think that you and your lawyers can outsmart entire mankind. > > now that's one constructive approach. > > sorry, "a p", but you and your mail strikes me as incredibly immature and > totally > unprofessional. what comp

Re: [IronPython] IronPython, please?

But as discussed in some of the previous posts, it does produces a "_main__.exe" when u run the ironpython on a *.py file so it is producing IL like a c# compiler. Ab. On 4/13/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > csc = c# compiler > > vbc = vb.net compiler > > jsc = jscript compi

[IronPython] To Compile or Not to compile, that's the question

I think that's a very lean way to describe a compiler: it creates an .exe file. But I see where you're coming from. IPC is short, so why not? Reginald -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Muhammad Abubakar Sent: woensdag 13 april 2005 14:26 T

RE: [IronPython] IronPython 0.7.2 Released

Thanks, Keith! Calling overloaded operators is not implemented yet and my quick test showed that at the moment you can't even call: Matrix.op_Multiply(a, a.Inverse) directly. We should have fix for this in the next release. Simple version of this is already working on my computer. Martin -

Re: [IronPython] To Compile or Not to compile, that's the question

On 4/13/05, R.R. Sprinkhuizen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think that's a very lean way to describe a compiler: it creates an .exe > file. But I see where you're coming from. > > IPC is short, so why not? IPC is also an acronym for interprocess communication. Might be confusing. > > Reginald

RE: [IronPython] To Compile or Not to compile, that's the question

> > I think that's a very lean way to describe a compiler: it creates an > > .exe file. But I see where you're coming from. > > > > IPC is short, so why not? > IPC is also an acronym for interprocess communication. Might be confusing. Seems like all the good names are taken... Cheers! Reginal

RE: [IronPython] To Compile or Not to compile, that's the question

I can't believe nobody is lobbying for pyc.exe ;) Brian Lloyd[EMAIL PROTECTED] V.P. Engineering 540.361.1716 Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > Travis Watkins > Sent: Wednesday, April 1

RE: [IronPython] To Compile or Not to compile, that's the question

Google found references to a pyc.exe, and none in English. +1 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Brian Lloyd Sent: Wed 4/13/2005 3:38 PM To: Travis Watkins; Discussion of IronPython Subject: RE: [IronPython] To Compile or Not to compile, that's the question

Re: [IronPython] To Compile or Not to compile, that's the question

Brian Lloyd wrote: I can't believe nobody is lobbying for pyc.exe ;) ...it might make more sense. Our PerlNET 'compiler' for example is 'plc.exe', in keeping with csc.exe, etc. cheers, JeffG Brian Lloyd[EMAIL PROTECTED] V.P. Engineering 540.361.1716 Zope Corporation http://www.zope.

Re: [IronPython] To Compile or Not to compile, that's the question

Me and my lean definitions. Anyway, plc is cool, so is csc. Thats why I said go for ipc. As far as google is concerned it'll return almost anything so I think its not useful to google first and than decide what name should be given to a compiler/interpreter/translator :) executable file. But I may