Microsoft's C# (Sharp) & .NET -- A Heads Up

[Paul Duffin]

Mark Hammond wrote:
> 
> "Paul Duffin" <pduffin at hursley.ibm.com> wrote in message
> news:397EDA34.9CFF2BF2 at hursley.ibm.com...
> 
> > How likely do you consider the possibility that Microsoft will change
> > the IL to allow the non-MS languages to be fully supported ?
> >
> > Unless the probability is VERY high
> 
> Better than "VERY high" - they have already done it.  MS have been
> _excellent_ at listening to 3rd party language feedback.  For example, the
> functional language guys are very impressed that MS managed to get tail
> recursion instructions in the VM, in time for the PDC.  No current or
> future MS languages have this requirement, and not even any of the
> (expected to be successful) commercial languages - it was done exclusively
> for the "little languages".
> 
> To be quite honest, I have been constantly amazed at the effort MS are
> putting into 3rd party languages.  It is more than mere hand-waving.
> 
> > what is the point of doing this
> > at all as you would end up with a versions of the language which were
> > not compatible with the other versions.
> 
> What is the point in making assumptions and statements like this?  Try
> finding some facts before you attempt to invent more "evil empire
> evidence" to support your conspiracy theories.
> 

Stop being so defensive. I asked you because I wanted to know. Your original
post said the IL didn't support all that Python (and other languages) 
needed and you didn't give any indication that MS were prepared to change 
the IL for those other languages. As they seem to be the second part of the
question was irrelevant and you should simply have ignored it.

You seem to have started off with some doubts as to whether MS would behave
nicely, you said above
	"To be quite honest, I have been constantly amazed at the 
	 effort MS are putting into 3rd party languages.  It is 
	 more than mere hand-waving."
So don't be surprised when others question MS intentions.

> But to address your point:  JPython is _not_ a perfect emulation of
> CPython, but it does allow you entry to the Java playground. Python .NET
> is similar - I don't expect anyone will use it when they want to work in
> an exclusively Python environment, just like almost no one uses JPython in
> that way now...
> 

I don't know Python well so maybe you could tell me how much of the 
language do you need to implement before you can write useful programs, 50%,
80%, 99% ???

How big a % does JPython implement ?

Why does JPython not support all that CPython does ?

Is there some problem with Java, or is it down to developer time ?

Assuming that MS enhances the IL with all the features that Python needs
what % do you think you can get ?

Would the set of functionality provided by Python.NET and JPython be the
same ?

What are the bits (if any) that CPython can do that either one or the 
other or both of Python.NET and JPython cannot do ?