CFMX, the future - via John Dowdell
This contains one of the statements that bug me.
rearchitecting CFML for the J2EE and .NET platforms
No, no, no....said this all before, it runs on J2EE and can expose .NET services :)
the following also I find interesting.
Edwin: Hypothetically, at some point we may decide to run on something other than a JVM. Again, it doesn’t make much sense to have Java source in there and then take it out again later. So we took the purist route.
Tim: Are you hinting at the possibility of compiling to MSIL as an option?
Edwin: I’m not hinting that we’re going to do it, but ... we had a design decision to make. We said, well, we can’t say we’re not going to do it. So we want to leave our options open.
If CFMX compiles to bytecodes then compiling to MSIL is not out of reach. The reason that CFMX does not currently compile to MSIL is that I suspect the decison was made when .NET was not mature enough. This of course is not the case anymore and providing that CFMX can meet the CIL requirements and it's type set can meet the CLT then a CFMX-MSIL compiler is achievable.
5:29:02 PM 
|
