Nonetheless, it does present some basis from which to start. I also suspect, specifically regarding the Starkiller paper, that some of the problems aren't all that relevent. For example, dynamic method creation: is that something that is going to be exposed outside of IronPython? If not, then do we need to worry about it? If so, such as a callback defined through some hosted scripting environment, then perhaps we say that callbacks must be unambiguous about their type. I'm willing to suggest that all such reference types must be strongly typed. Strings, numbers, and other primitives should be fairly simple otherwise.
Not that my musings should matter -- this is well out of my experience. ;) -----Original Message----- From: Timothy Fitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 9:22 PM Also, Starkiller makes assumptions that IronPython absolutely cannot (no eval and others more egregious). And now, on the extremely blindingly bright side of things, there is PyPy. It does type inferencing in a rather different way than Starkiller, and is designed for targeting different output formats (CLI!) So the idea is definitely alive and kicking (and now well funded by the European Union). _______________________________________________ users-ironpython.com mailing list users-ironpython.com@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
