>IronPython clearly doesn't work this way...
IronPython and all the other DLR lanugages are compiled to CIL and then to bytecode just like every other high level .Net lanugage.
>You cannot fathom how writing the opcodes to a textfile, performing some API to operate on the textfile, and negotiating the compiled result into the current address space is more difficult than simply writing to the current address space directly?
You continue to think you know what you are talking about but you do not. One does not write opcodes to a text file. They would write the assembly language mnemonics to a text file.
>Interactive .NET compilers almost always use Reflection.Emit and AssemblyBuilder to construct the assembly in memory, and simply run it. They don't usually mess with the asssembly-mnemonics any more than JVM-targetting compilers do.
Reflection.Emit only works for a language already running on .Net. You cannot use it to implement your newly created language.
VB.Net has its own CIL compiler. C# has its own CLR compiler. The other languages do to. The compliation APIs use those compilers. Those APIs were not used to implement a lanuage.
>Compilers lex and parse as they like, then call GetILGenerator() for the method.
So this magical compiler for a language I just created can be parsed by .Net and generate the CIL code magically. WOW!
>and as I still maintain: the fact that there is an assembly mnemonics and a IL assembler is practically meaningless.
VB.Net, C#, J# and 40+ others running first class on .Net. Java and that's it running first class on Java. Java has been around for longer than .Net and has far fewer languages.
You are contending that any given machine (real or virtual) should have 1 first class high level language to program on it (and a couple 3rd world ones).
The single base CIL language makes implementing languages on .Net more practicle than on Java.
>in a text file, rename it to dot-com, and your computer will run it. It will even do something meaningful.
hahaha wow thats not how that works. If I name it .txt it opens in Notepad. That doesn't mean that my .txt file is the Notepad program.
>What exactly is your point again? IL bytecodes are significantly better than JVM bytecodes because .NET ships with an assembler for them?
Standard low level code modification. Many languages.
>So what? JPEG files are not executable binaries. Do you have a point in there?
Just as an .asm file needs to be assembled to be interpreted, a jpeg file needs a program to interpret it. That jpeg program is not a text file of assmebler as you are contending.