Comments on: Zoo: A (Still) Imaginary .NET Scripting Language

By: DougHolton

DougHolton — Mon, 02 May 2005 02:40:56 +0000

Now that boo’s duck typing features have been expanded a lot lately, I and others are interested in creating python-like classes in boo. See this mixins example: http://docs.codehaus.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=13653
and the examples at the bottom of this page for starting points: http://boo.codehaus.org/Duck+Typing (duck-5.boo and XmlObject.boo)

And once we work on making these more dynamic classes more usable, we can add them to a “boo.utilities” dll included with boo.

I don’t think we can do something like extend the builtin “int” class though (you can subclass it of course), unless you create your own boo compiler step (see http://boo.codehaus.org/Boo+Compiler ) that tells the compiler to use your own classes for primitive types like int instead of system.int32. (so “x = 3″ would be translated into “x as DotNetObjectWrapper = DotNetObjectWrapper(3)”.

By: Bas Westerbaan

Bas Westerbaan — Sun, 01 May 2005 16:57:48 +0000

Really? :p Kaja’s px jit is coming along quite nicely (some code can be found here: http://entertheunknown.net/px/code/)

By: Zef Hemel

Zef Hemel — Sun, 01 May 2005 15:39:31 +0000

But as long as .NET doesn’t support those, we’re out of luck. Unless you programme your own VM, but that’s a little too much right now.

By: Bas Westerbaan

Bas Westerbaan — Sun, 01 May 2005 15:14:26 +0000

It probably is quite fun but it isn’t as quick as it could be. When you would nativly implement such dynamical features in the JIT it would have the same performance as the normal way which it certainly won’t have when using wrappers :p.