[Mono-devel-list] Reuse parts of MCS in Class Libraries?

[Mark]

Jon,

Thank you for taking the time to respond. I appreciate your feedback.

> To answer an unstated question: The C# class libraries (mscorlib.dll,
> System.dll, etc.) are under the MIT/X11 license (like BSD without the
> advertising clause), NOT GPL/LGPL.  The mcs compiler *is* GPL.  The
> tools in the "tools" directory have a variety of licenses, mostly GPL.
> 
> It's the mono runtime libraries (libmono.so and related; basically the
> JIT, internal calls, and anything written in C) which are LGPL.

Thank you for that explanation. That helps to understand that.

> To clarify, CodeDom is not used to parse existing code.  It's used to
> generate source code, which can then be handed to an external compiler
> to be compiled into an assembly.

Yes. You are right. It is just an API for generating code. However, I 
thought it could be much more and I can see that what I want may not fit 
in well at the moment.

Standards Conformance
=====================
As an aside, I don't think MS has any problem with deviating from any 
given standard, even their own. Wouldn't it be possible for Mono to 
extend and deviate from the standard in either the class libraries or 
the runtime itself? Wouldn't it be possible to put attributes around 
non-standard code and a compiler option could determine if those 
additional attributes will be allowed? Then, using Mono, you could 
target cross-platform (ie MS .NET and Mono) or stick to Mono and use 
additional, enhanced things.

My Background
===============
I've worked on DelphiWebScript (http://www.dwscript.com/) an MPL 
licensed scripting tool for Delphi. I had written several types of code 
generators for this tool and had many other plans that were too 
complicated to implement until .NET and Mono came along. I look to Mono 
to bring what I've missed in Linux... namely a very productive and 
powerful coding environment.

Real Goals
================
I want a high-level abstraction of code. I want objects to represent 
types and expressions. I want to be able to manipulate these objects in 
either a commercial or GPL project. I want the object representations to 
be exported as code or IL for immediate use or in an assembly. I see 
much of what I want in the Mono compiler. However, it isn't quite a 
match and I don't expect my additions or changes to be well received as 
they are not mainstream. I misunderstood the CodeDom and thought it 
would generate the IL directly and skip the requirement for a code 
representation. Now, if you imagined the CodeDom being like the MCS 
(objects for code types and expressions) and that the CodeDom objects 
could be converted to text or IL then that would be exactly what I want.

I was hoping that the CodeDom would give me that.

If there is something else that is better suited then please let me know.

> See:    http://lists.ximian.com/archives/public/mono-list/2002-May/005929.html

Thanks for the reference.


> System.Reflection.Emit is a better bet for dynamic languages, and some
> of the enhancements in .NET 2.0 such as DynamicMethods will make this
> easier:
> 
> 	http://longhorn.msdn.microsoft.com/lhsdk/ref/ns/system.reflection.emit/c/dynamicmethod/dynamicmethod.aspx

Very interesting. This is, in fact, a partial solution for me. However, 
it is still too limited for my larger goals. I agree that S.R.Emit is a 
better solution. I mistakenly thought that the CodeDom did this.

If you are interested, I would like to talk further about the larger 
goals off-list. I haven't explained what I'd do with it yet. :) I'd like 
to talk with Miguel about it too but I don't want to be a pest as I 
realize he and others are very busy. I don't think this is the right 
forum to get into it though. If you know Miguel better, do you think it 
appropriate for me to send him an email with a more detailed description 
of my ideas? I'd love to work for Novell and do it full time. ;)

>>Reuse or Recode?
>>========================
[...]
> As stated before, this is fine as long as the licensing conditions can
> be met.  As you're looking for something that can be used in proprietary
> software, you can't use mcs for this.

Correct. This is my dilema. I want this ability to make my development 
efforts at work much easier but also usable in GPL applications. I don't 
see a way to do it right now.

Thanks for your responses. If you or anyone else has any other ideas for 
how to achieve this then I would appreciate it.

-Mark E.