"Availability of a static type" not because IronPython would need to access one but because it would need to expose one.
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 9:44 AM, Keith J. Farmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You can create your own attribute classes, for whatever markup. > Particularly since LINQ-to-*, where they often are used to annotate data > classes with strings, etc (not references to types). > > In any event, why does "availability of a static type" enter into this? IP > can access static types just as well as any other .NET language (System.Math > comes to mind). The motivation in general is to make IP a better producer > for CLR types, rather than just a consumer, and attributes are an > increasingly important thing to support. > > As for expression trees and extension methods, those are to make IP a > better consumer of a very important API (LINQ and the IQueryable stack from > .NET 3.5). > > To be honest, once those 3 features are available in IP, I think it would > be on par with the mainstream languages in being very usable in an exclusive > sense. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Harry Pierson > Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2008 11:14 PM > To: Discussion of IronPython > Subject: Re: [IronPython] IronPython Post 2.0 Roadmap > > Can you give me some examples where you would use these? The problem I see > is that many scenarios (WCF contracts, XML serialization just to name two) > where people want to use a custom attribute depends on the availability of a > static type. > > Harry > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith J. Farmer > Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2008 8:13 PM > To: Discussion of IronPython > Subject: Re: [IronPython] IronPython Post 2.0 Roadmap > > votes++ > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Foord > Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2008 10:38 AM > To: Discussion of IronPython > Subject: Re: [IronPython] IronPython Post 2.0 Roadmap > > Sanghyeon Seo wrote: > > 2008/7/20 Harry Pierson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > >> Hosting features are all done via the DLR, so that's a separate team. As > for > >> "ability to interact with the rest of the .Net framework", can you be > more > >> specific about what you're looking for in that space? What *isn't* IPy > doing > >> that you want it to? > >> > > > > .NET attributes? > > > > > +1 :-) > > Michael > > -- > http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/ > http://www.voidspace.org.uk/ > http://www.trypython.org/ > http://www.ironpython.info/ > http://www.theotherdelia.co.uk/ > http://www.resolverhacks.net/ > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users@lists.ironpython.com > http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users@lists.ironpython.com > http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users@lists.ironpython.com > http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users@lists.ironpython.com > http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com >
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
