While I surfed Active States website I noticed a tiny paragraph that got me quite interested.
Perl and Python for .NET Research

Experimental Perl and Python compilers for the .NET Framework. These are research prototypes and not full implementations. > more info
Problem is that "more info" link doesn't quite work.

http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/NET/index.html

Anyone knows anything more about it?
  • Comment on Perl compiler for .NET - anyone knows anything about it?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Perl compiler for .NET - anyone knows anything about it?
by tilly (Archbishop) on Sep 03, 2005 at 00:39 UTC
    I remember hearing about this a few years ago. A bit later I heard that they got it running, and found that what they got running was way too slow to be useful. Perl's highly dynamic internal opcodes are not a good match for C#'s internal bytecode engine.

    I believe that ActiveState sells a product that links a native C version of Perl into C#. I've not heard anything more (and I'm not sure that they do - I don't use Windows or C# so don't rely on me for those products).

    But if you want a scripting language built into C#, I've heard that IronPython is a fairly complete implementation. I consider Python and Perl pretty similar in capability (if not "feel"), so that might meet your needs.

      No I'm not looking at just any scripting language built into C# - I actually consider Perl to be much more than just scripting language :)

      Damn I can do so crazy (in good sense) things in Perl that I could only dream off in say C++ (or code half a day to accomplish those 5 minute things).

      The thing that I plan to work more on is GUI (desktop apps) programming with Perl as I'm now mostly into web programming. The reason for sticking to just web programming is partly that user needs to go through hassle of installing Perl (on Windows boxes) just to run my application.

      Yes I know about PAR and other similar solutions - but having .NET IL code would be somewhat more secure than shipping your source...

        What you are looking for is PDK, namely PerlNET.

        The Perl code is not compiled into .Net IL (since that was too slow), but you can create a DLL that (from the outside) will look just like any other .NET dll and you will be able to use .Net stuff from Perl and Perl stuff from .Net. Been there, done that. All you need apart from the generated DLL when shipping the app are two more DLLs.

        Jenda
        XML sucks. Badly. SOAP on the other hand is the most powerfull vacuum pump ever invented.

Re: Perl compiler for .NET - anyone knows anything about it?
by spiritway (Vicar) on Sep 03, 2005 at 06:30 UTC

    That link went to here. It's the page at activestate where they show their various products. Among them are visual Perl and visual Python, both referred to as "development environment plug-ins". HTH

      Yes I know where link takes you - but look closer in your browser's bar when you put mouse over the link (or check the html sourse code).

      It's completely different URL than one you end up with. And in fact you never see that Research is mentioned on that page...

      I know about those plug-ins for MS VS - and I've tried the Visual Perl. Somehow it's not standard MS VS (I worked with C# - still have to pass exam on my university) nor it's Perl. Feels a bit strange.

      I much more liked their Komodo - but even it needs few things solved to be excellent.

        You're right - I hadn't caught that... sorry.

        It's pretty standard, that if you're going to re-organize sections of your web page, that you set up redirection, so that the moved items don't generate 404 errors.

        The fact that the URL isn't the one in the link isn't that big of a deal. If you really want to know where it used to go to, you can always try the Wayback Machine from The Internet Archive:

        http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.activestate.com/Products/Perl_Dev_Kit/

        This won't work if the site had a robots.txt at the time, that denied spidering of the site, but in this case, there are multiple versions available.