[Mono-list] Javascript and Mono

[Jeroen Janssen]

Miguel de Icaza wrote:

>The *CodeProvider classes are just factories to create an object that
>can generate source code from your program.  They are just a nice
>wrapper that lets you in a language independent fashion "write code".
>
>This is used mostly by ASP.NET, and never ever talks to mcs or mbas
>directly.  Those interfaces will generate a temporary file on disk, and
>the invoke the compiler to compile the temporary file.
>
Do mcs and mbas use the CodeProvider classes in the same way as ASP.NET 
(or could that be used the same way?)
I mean, is that the way to work with the CodeProvider classes?

>As far as JavaScript is concerned, the same will happen: these are two
>different problems.
>
Uh.. I'm lost, what 2 different problems do you mean?
Or let me rephrase the question:

If we have CodeProvider classes, can we use these for the compiler? (in 
other words, the compiler would just be a 'commandline wrapper' around 
the CodeProvider class).

>>Hmm.. will jsc conflict with the already present jsc (on Windows)
>>I thought the 'leading' m was common practice for the 'mono' compilers :)
>>    
>>
>
>The story is a bit more complex than that.  When I started writing mcs,
>this was long before it became serious, it stood for "miguel's
>c-sharp".  This is obviously far from a serious name, so officially we
>call it the `mono c# compiler'.
>
Glad your name starts with an M :)

>I do not particularly care about the name of the compiler (for both jsc
>and csc).  There are pros and cons in both cases.  Pros for using the
>same names and same arguments as the Microsoft counterparts: existing
>scripts and makefiles are easier to "port".  The con is that in Windows
>you dont know what compiler you are invoking ;-)
>  
>
Yes, but I think it would be good if all compilers follow the same 
'guideline' (I don't mind which one),
so I think the best for now if to name it mjsc?
---
Jeroen Janssen