[Mono-list] Questions mostly about IL asembler

[Miguel de Icaza]

> You didn't answer the question.
> 
> The question was not "does the Mono project need an implementation of
> ILASM", it was (paraphrasing) "Why is Portable.net's ILASM implementation
> not appropriate for Mono?".

Oh, I guess all this time I was assuming in my head that we were
thinking `The C# ildasm will be contained in a class'.  This for
reusability from the CLI universe side of things.

My posts makes more sense if you made this assumption (I think it was
in the original task list?)

> An implementation of ILASM would be useful for interoperating with
> compilers that generate IL assembly language, rather than PE files.
> The Mercury compiler is one example.  I might be biased, but I think
> this use is far more important than supporting hand-written IL.

that too.

Miguel.