[m-dev.] IL, Mono and Portable .NET

[Jonathan Morgan]

On 2/1/06, Julien Fischer <juliensf at cs.mu.oz.au> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 1 Feb 2006, Jonathan Morgan wrote:
>
> > Any idea how much work it would be to natively support Mono or DotGnu
> for
> > the IL backend with both mmake and mmc --make?
>
> I've just tried it with DotGNU and compiled most of the library with both
> mmake and mmc --make.  It looks like there is a bug in the MLDS backend
> that
> causes it to duplicate definitions in the IL code when compiling
> library/injection.m (which is where it dies for me at the moment)


And the seriousness of such a bug is?

> Is it likely to be just a matter of adding their programs to the configure
> > script and then choosing command line options depending on the compiler,
> or
> > will more work be needed to get the IL compiling?
>
> Essentially the former, probably some of the XXX comments in
> scripts/Mmake.vars.in also need to be addressed.  The patch below
> partially
> adds support for DotGNU.


Thanks.  I'll give it a try sometime.

> I think it would also be necessary to add a command line option to disable
> > MC++, and have that on by default if no MC++ compiler is detected (the
> only
> > MC++ code in the standard library is in benchmarking.m).
>
> The only MC++ code I can see in benchmarking.m is commented out anyway; if
> at
> all possible it should just be implemented in C#.


You're right - I hadn't noticed that.   I was assuming there was some good
reason to have it as MC++, as Peter said they thought it was the flakiest of
the three compilers, which is why most of the library is in C# or IL.

> Also, it's worth noting that (with patches committed recently) Mercury's
> IL
> > backend works perfectly with the .NET SDK 1.1 (which is probably a
> better
> > thing to recommend).  I haven't yet tried 0.12.2 to see if it works out
> of
> > the box, but it should do.
>
> There shouldn't be any difference with 0.12.2.



So I would assume, but as you can see from mercury-users,  I can't even get
mercury-compiler-0.12.2 even starting to compile on Cygwin, and the IL grade
refuses to build under MSYS/MinGW.

> > I would like to test it with .NET Framework 2.0, but I haven't yet got
hold

> > of all the necessary compilers.  Expect results sometime.
>
> Great! Looking forward to them.
>
> Julien.


Jon
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mercurylang.org/archives/developers/attachments/20060201/fc1bc20e/attachment.html>