SPUG: Is Perl for .NET on anyone's radar?

JD Brennan jazzdev at gmail.com
Wed Aug 23 16:41:30 PDT 2006

Yes, there a number of languages you can use that
will run in a JVM.   Jython, J/Ruby, Rhino (JavaScript),
and JScheme are just the ones I know a bit about.
I'm not sure that Sun did anything to encourage this
besides publishing the spec for the JVM.  But that's
getting off topic for this list.

I can think of 3 ways to approach this problem:

1) Write a Perl interpreter in C#
2) Write a translator from Perl to C#
3) Write a translator (compiler) from Perl to CLR byte codes

2 might be interesting since you could write it in Perl.
Jython and JScheme use approach 1.  JScheme also
does 3.  And, of course, if you do 2 you get a way to
do 3 also, though it'll have the performance and
debugging drawbacks that the old C-front version of C++
had back in the day.


On 8/23/06, David S. Patterson <david.s.patterson at usa.net> wrote:
> I imagine writing a language translation layer for perl on top of JVM
> would be a major, major project.  I'm sure a worthy one, but since I don't
> program in Java I'll just have to let it go by.  By the way, has this been
> done for any other language?  I think the java people may feel like that
> since they're already giving you platform independance, if you want to use
> the JVM just use it via Java.
> But I do an awful lot of work in C# on the .NET platform, yet I still miss
> the convenience of the perl syntax and language constructs.
> Also I'm impressed with the facilities and even coaching MS has provided
> for those that want to instantiate a new language binding on top of the
> CLI.  That's why, I'm sure, the Python people were able to succeed.
> Most recently, the Monad group has made progress and has released Windows
> Power Shell http://www.microsoft.com/technet/scriptcenter/hubs/msh.mspx which is a new way of lashing together .NET CLR objects to do useful work
> using this new shell scripting language.
> But for me, I'm more interested in perl as a programming language, because
> it is so expressive (you get a lot of bang for each line of code you write)
> and it is precisely this linking and pipelining behavior that seems like
> would be a good fit on top of the .NET API.
> Just my three cents...
> _____________________________________________________________
> Seattle Perl Users Group Mailing List
>     POST TO: spug-list at pm.org
> SUBSCRIPTION: http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/spug-list
>    MEETINGS: 3rd Tuesdays
>    WEB PAGE: http://seattleperl.org/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.pm.org/pipermail/spug-list/attachments/20060823/53754178/attachment.html 

More information about the spug-list mailing list