I copied the example and wondered why it won't work, a slight typo (mix of single and double quotes) in your example, should probably be:
print 'All running processes:'
But very interesting, I did not look into IronPython myself a lot but read most about it here...
Probably unnecessary to say but keep up the nice work 
Oops. 
Thanks
Once again I have a dual view. On the one hand, yeah that code is clean and very nice. On the other hand, the segmentation between Python and IronPython is really starting to worry me. I don't like how much direct .Net use is done in the IronPython community, or how they refuse to include the standard library (even the pure python modules would be welcome) with the IronPython releases. This is just leading to two separate languages and that is not what we need.
Something like this is easier in IronPython than regular Python, so what should you do? I think you should say "Python needs a stdlib facility to list process data." and then have an IronPython implementation that wraps the Process.GetProcesses() you use. The only other option is going to be me starting a project to make .Net API compatible pure-python modules mirroring the .Net namespaces for use in other Python implementations, so that all this IronPython-specific code you all keep writing is actually portable.
Are you in a position to publish the pywin32 version? At least the essence of it, for comparison purposes?
The code that you posted works in CPython also if you install Python.NET.
Calvin: What is the difference between relying on 'pywin32' (a platform specific library which is not a standard part of Python), and relying on .NET ?
If you wanted to make your code portable, there is nothing to stop you wrapping it with another layer.
Thomas: There hasn't been much *obvious* sign of Python.NET development for a while - which is a great shame, for many situations it would be *better* than IronPython.
Tim: I'll try and dig it out and post in a new comment...
Commenting by HaloScan
