[boost] Re: Re: BGL ported to C#

From: Edward Diener (eddielee_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-12-13 08:35:47

David Bergman wrote:
> Patrick wrote:
>
>>> Surprised you didn't try to port it to MC++. It might have
>> been easier.
>>
>> But much less portable.  With C#, people at least have a few
>> compiler and runtime options.  Beyond that, C#-based
>> assemblies can actually be used on multiple platforms unlike
>> those compiled from MC++.
>
> Hmm, I do not quite understand that (having worked extensively with
> both
> MC++ and C#)
>
> Is not MSVC 7.1 (part of the VS.NET 2003 for you MS lovers out there)
> capable of producing verifiable MSIL using C++? So, what would the
> obstacles be on different platforms (such as Mono and .NET Compact
> Framework)?

There are none. Mr. Hartling's statement is just plain wrong, as you have
surmised. Any .NET CLS compliant language can produce .NET classes which can
be derived from and consumed by any other .NET CLS compliant language. MC++
is fully capable of producing CLS compliant code.