Microsoft's Dynamic Languages Runtime (DLR)

[Kaz Kylheku]

The only off-topic posting in this thread is your own (and now this
one).

You are making a very clumsy entrance into these newsgroups. So far
you have started two cross-posted threads. The first is only topical
in comp.lang.python (how to emulate macros in Python). This one is
topical in neither one, since it is about Microsoft DLR.

It's quite possible that some Lisp and Python programmers have a
strong interest in Microsoft DLR. Those people who have such an
interest (regardless of whether they are Lisp and Python user also)
and who like to read Usenet will almost certainly find a Microsoft DLR
newsgroup for reading about and discussing Microsoft DLR. Do you not
agree?

Also note that there is very rarely, if ever, any good reason for
starting a thread which is crossposted among comp.lang.* newsgroups,
even if the subject contains elements that are topical in all of them
(yours does not).

Begone.

You are childishly beckoning Usenet etiquette to be gone so that you
may do whatever you wish. But I trust that you will not, out of spite
for being rebuked, turn a few small mistakes into a persistent style.

 

[Tony Nelson]

You are making a very clumsy entrance into these newsgroups.

...

Go away.
________________________________________________________________________
TonyN.:' *firstname*nlsnews@georgea*lastname*.com
' <http://www.georgeanelson.com/>

 

[Fuzzyman]

You are making a very clumsy entrance into these newsgroups. So far
you have started two cross-posted threads. The first is only topical
in comp.lang.python (how to emulate macros in Python). This one is
topical in neither one, since it is about Microsoft DLR.

It's quite possible that some Lisp and Python programmers have a
strong interest in Microsoft DLR. Those people who have such an
interest (regardless of whether they are Lisp and Python user also)
and who like to read Usenet will almost certainly find a Microsoft DLR
newsgroup for reading about and discussing Microsoft DLR. Do you not
agree?

Given that the DLR is a dynamic language framework, abstracted out of
the IronPython 1.0 release, and that it also runs on top of the core
CLR shipped with SilverLight meaning that for the first time sandboxed
Python scripts can run in the browser...

It would seem entirely on topic for a Python newsgroup.... very on-
topic...

Fuzzyman
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/ironpython/index.shtml

 

[Steven Howe]

Given that the DLR is a dynamic language framework, abstracted out of
the IronPython 1.0 release, and that it also runs on top of the core
CLR shipped with SilverLight meaning that for the first time sandboxed
Python scripts can run in the browser...

It would seem entirely on topic for a Python newsgroup.... very on-
topic...

Fuzzyman
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/ironpython/index.shtml

Thank goodness! I was getting ready to filter the DLR crap out. If it's
from microsoft,
it got to be crap.
sph

 

[Fuzzyman]

Fuzzyman wrote: [snip ...]

Thank goodness! I was getting ready to filter the DLR crap out. If it's
from microsoft,
it got to be crap.

Yeah - I mean what does Jim hugunin know about Python anyway... Bound
to be crap...

Fuzzyman
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/ironpython/index.shtml

 

[=?iso-8859-1?q?Luis_M=2E_Gonz=E1lez?=]

Given that the DLR is a dynamic language framework, abstracted out of
the IronPython 1.0 release, and that it also runs on top of the core
CLR shipped with SilverLight meaning that for the first time sandboxed
Python scripts can run in the browser...

It would seem entirely on topic for a Python newsgroup.... very on-
topic...

Fuzzymanhttp://www.voidspace.org.uk/ironpython/index.shtml

Indeed, the subject is absolutely on-topic.
If can't talk about a so called "Dynamic Languages Runtime" in a
pyhton mailing list, I wonder what it takes to be considered on-topic.
Frankly, this on-topic/off-topic fascism I see in this list is pissing
me off a little bit.

I suggest reading this paragraph right from http://www.python.org/community/lists/:

"Pretty much anything Python-related is fair game for discussion, and
the group is even fairly tolerant of off-topic digressions; there have
been entertaining discussions of topics such as floating point, good
software design, and other programming languages such as Lisp and
Forth."

Luis

 

[Paul Boddie]

Indeed, the subject is absolutely on-topic.
If can't talk about a so called "Dynamic Languages Runtime" in a
pyhton mailing list, I wonder what it takes to be considered on-topic.
Frankly, this on-topic/off-topic fascism I see in this list is pissing
me off a little bit.

It's less on-topic for comp.lang.lisp, though, unless you want to
perform in a measuring competition with the Lisp crowd whilst hearing
how they did the very same thing as <insert technology here> way back
in the 1950s. Despite the permissive licences - it'd be hard to slap a
bad EULA on IronPython now - the whole thing demonstrates Microsoft's
disdain for open standards as usual, but it remains on-topic for
comp.lang.python, I guess.

Paul

 

[Fuzzyman]

It's less on-topic for comp.lang.lisp, though, unless you want to
perform in a measuring competition with the Lisp crowd whilst hearing
how they did the very same thing as <insert technology here> way back
in the 1950s. Despite the permissive licences - it'd be hard to slap a
bad EULA on IronPython now - the whole thing demonstrates Microsoft's
disdain for open standards as usual,

How do you work that out? It seems like a very positive move from
them.

As for SilverLight, there will probably be a fully open implementation
by the end of the year.

Fuzzyman
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/ironpython/index.shtml

 

[Paul Boddie]

How do you work that out? It seems like a very positive move from
them.

Well, I don't think the W3C have been *particularly* effective in
defining updated but still relevant standards and bringing them to my
particular part of the big developer table of late, but I think the
different open standards (XHTML, CSS, SVG and so on) have some mileage
in them yet. I'd rather see moderately slow improvement to those
standards than have some break-out group of vested interests (eg.
WHATWG, Microsoft, Adobe) define some pseudo-standard that is even
more tightly bound to their pet implementations than some of the stuff
that gets a W3C blessing (which is how some people could perceive the
W3C standards process).

A permissive licence on the DLR technologies may be positive, but a
cursory inspection of Microsoft's site doesn't reveal much in a
similar vein for the Silverlight technologies. At least technologies
like XUL (which is itself "standards-polluting" if used to deliver Web
applications to the wider public) are the product of an open
development process and have first-class open source implementations.
Still, I'm a cynic about a lot of add-ons to the Web, and I think Sean
McGrath makes a valid point:

http://seanmcgrath.blogspot.com/2007_04_29_seanmcgrath_archive.html#9180786898079500068

Usability isn't always about duplicating the desktop paradigm in a
browser window or encouraging the proliferation of "cool" but closed
technologies which may reveal the glory of an application's "rich"
user experience to those with the latest Microsoft updates, but which
excludes other users for no good reason.

As for SilverLight, there will probably be a fully open implementation
by the end of the year.

We'll see. It may depend on how well the Mono people can play catch-up
with Microsoft, but given the sprinkling of potentially optional but
undoubtedly patented technologies (WMA, MP3, and various others, I
imagine), I doubt that "fully open" will ever really apply to any
implementation.

Paul