On ::Manageability:: there's an interesting post about how bad Microsoft's CLR is for running interpretive languages. I had heard it was bad in this area, but I had no clue just how bad it was.
Finally, this brings up alot of new questions about Microsoft's submission of the CLR( rather CLI) to the ECMA standards body. First of all, clearly the CLR is not as "common" as we may have meant to believe. Second, Microsoft continues to change the IL at a whim, just look at the proposed generics addition to C# .
That's interesting. Do the proposed additions to C# definitely change the IL?
This brings me something I was thinking about today... I was helping a friend write a Windows Script Host script. He'd written most of it in JavaScript (sorry, JScript) like I'd recommended. Then he needed to get a little user input, and we realized there's no way to do it in JScript, though there is in VBScript. So, even though both languages are scripting engines provided by Microsoft and meant to run as an ActiveX scripting engine for use in the Windows Script Host, one is limited compared to the other. The only solution we had was to rewrite it in VBScript. I told my friend that this is what Microsoft does... even though they supposedly provide a common framework, they favor their own blessed language. It's the same with C#.
Saturday, December 14, 2002
Permalink
Feel free to post a comment below. Please see my comment policy.
Formatting Rules (No HTML):