man, this thread on the list about boo + dlr...

i'm getting burnt out on hearing about it

Yep. DLR might be nice, but there is no explicit need for it.

i just feel like all of these people are totally missing the point

what about the compiler extensibility?

how do you implement AbstractAstAttribute, AbstractMacroAttribute, MetaMethodAttribute, etc in a DLR language?

not to mention that i've yet to see a DLR language that implements CLR attributes (whether this is a design or technical limitation I do not know)

anywho.. it's annoying. i just want to tell them to shut up.. i had a five paragraph to that thread.. but i just discarded it because it's not really worth it

five paragraph reply, even

well i just merged justin chase's installer work with the peglexer stuff

so hopefully we'll have a boolangstudio that runs in the main hive here, shortly

then i have to combine that branch with the intellisense branch that james gregory has

fun fun

Griep is excited about pfox's work.

on the PEG stuff?

In general with the BooLangStudio

I don't know why, but I've had so many issues with IDEs using Boo

Yeah, but for an organization, such as mine, that has become interested in using Boo, having it integrate into the IDE can seal the deal.

oh cool

sorting through the installer stuff as we speak

i'm gonna have justin look at it.. i feel like i'll do more harm than good

interesting

the replies from max on that DLR thread seem to indicate that DLR stuff can output IL the same way

and that i may have been wrong about some other stuff

which is cool, if it means that the DLR is better suited to some tasks than i thought