Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.chainon-marquant.org!nntpfeed.proxad.net!feeder1-1.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!news.glorb.com!usenet.stanford.edu!not-for-mail From: Ben Pfaff Newsgroups: comp.programming Subject: Re: Roslyn compilers Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 09:29:05 -0700 Lines: 11 Message-ID: <87k47tdoha.fsf@blp.benpfaff.org> References: <3d557d28-324e-41a6-b135-b4d5860fcf08@u10g2000prl.googlegroups.com> Reply-To: Ben Pfaff Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: usenet.stanford.edu 1319560202 17684 127.0.0.1 (25 Oct 2011 16:30:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: action@cs.stanford.edu User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:byIWU7//plGWzuLnw4IjRm+B+9c= Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.programming:955 Notinheritable writes: > why rewrite both c# and vb compilers. Without starting some kind of > language debate, why can't Microsoft rewrite only one of the > compilers? Why the duplicated effort? What makes you think that MS can't rewrite just one of their compilers? -- Ben Pfaff http://benpfaff.org