Re: [Vala] Hi, Is Vala what I am looking for?

[Jiří Zárevúcky <zarevucky jiri gmail com>]

On 09/23/2009 05:24 PM, "Andrés G. Aragoneses" wrote:
> Jiří Zárevúcky wrote:
>    
> > On 09/21/2009 10:52 PM, "Andrés G. Aragoneses" wrote:
> >      
> > > [...]
> > > Of course, what I'm talking about is about adding one more user choice,
> > > not "removal of Mono" like the subject of the original thread is named
> > > (especially if you consider that I work for Novell on some Mono class
> > > libraries ;) ). At last, what you could say is "removal of Mono runtime"
> > > if we want to refer to this topic.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > >      Andres
> > >
> > >
> > >        
> > You can't compile C# code with what Vala uses. It just wouldn't work.
> > Ever. C# code is *designed* to work under GC and by replacing Mono with
> > something different you achieve nothing. I can't believe people still
> > bring up such topics.
> >      
> Hey Jiri,
>
> (Short question: with "ever", do you mean even contributing patches to
> the Vala Project?)
>
> Longer questions:  many thanks for your input. Sorry but it's the first
> time I see someone mentioning that C# is *designed* to work under GC. I
> mean, of course I knew it was, but I didn't know that meant for sure
> that it cannot ever work with a reference counting approach. Can you
> tell me the exact bits of the C# grammar that would disallow this? I
> mean, what's the fundamental difference between Vala language and C#
> language (note I'm not talking about runtimes here) in respect to GC?
> Let me guess for a sec: are the keywords "owned" and "unowned" related?
>
> Thanks,
>
>         Andres
>
>    

You misread me. I'm not talking about C#, I'm talking about code written 
in it. Changes you would need to do in C# program to make it work with 
GObject are far from trivial and certainly not doable by a compiler. In 
another words: porting program from C# to Vala is very difficult even 
for a human, and I'm not even beginning to think about reflection and 
such. You essentially need to rewrite it completely, so if the similar 
syntax led you to believe this is achievable by compiler, you are quite 
wrong.

Hope this answers your question. :)