RE: [Rubydotnet-developer] Getting necessary metadata on Ruby classes for externalization...

[Ben S. <bsc...@pr...>]

Hi John, all,

> At least this is how we've approached our development of our=20
> Ruby.NET bridge to
> date. Now what I think would be interesting is to develop=20
> some sort of runtime
> wrapper technology for .NET to be able to call ruby classes=20
> that implement a
> certain interface.  This would be less an exercise in=20
> annotating a ruby class
> and generating an assembly at "compile time" and more an=20
> issue of generating a
> .net wrapper of the Ruby class at runtime (emit the IL) based=20
> upon interface
> signatures.

It occurs to me that, if we had this technology, we could use it to =
create new Ruby types for people to consume, if we were willing to do =
separate compilation.  We would just create the .NET interface in its =
own assembly and then write a Ruby class to implement it.

Over the long run, or if I was doing a lot of consuming of new Ruby =
types from .NET, I think I would prefer something like Richard =
describes, as it keeps the declarations near the code.  The =
implementation-from-Ruby code could be extended to create the new =
interface assembly from the extern declarations.

Regards,
Ben Schroeder