Front page | perl.bootstrap |
Postings from July 2000
Re: LALR
From:
Dan Sugalski
Date:
July 24, 2000 18:27
Subject:
Re: LALR
Message ID:
Pine.LNX.4.10.10007242134340.25215-100000@tuatha.sidhe.org
On Mon, 24 Jul 2000, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> According to horos:
> > There has to be a tradeoff between the syntax and the embeddability
> > and portability of perl. The best way to make something embedded is
> > by making it regular, clean, and clear; I believe that LALR is the
> > best way to achieve this..
>
> Well, embeddability is only one of the various goals that Perl is
> stretch{ed,ing} toward. Larry can't simplify the language too much,
> or it won't have Perl's strengths any more.
Embeddability's also orthogonal to any syntax issues. It makes no
difference *what* perl does, within broad reason, to the embedding app, if
all it needs to do to run some perl code is:
status = Perl_run_code(&my_interp, "&foo", param_array);
from within it.
Granted there's the whole "We both use the same shared library" issue that
could crop up (depending on the library), but that's not that big a deal
most times in most places.
Dan
-
RE: Threads, reentrancy, and suchlike things (was: Re: Working Group Proposal)
by Moore, Paul
-
Working Group Proposal
by Kurt D. Starsinic
-
RE: Threads, reentrancy, and suchlike things
by Moore, Paul
-
Re: Threads, reentrancy, and suchlike things (was: Re: Working Gr oup Proposal)
by simon
-
RE: Threads, reentrancy, and suchlike things (was: Re: Working Group Proposal)
by Moore, Paul
-
Re: Threads, reentrancy, and suchlike things (was: Re: Working Group Proposal)
by Benjamin Stuhl
-
Re: implementation strategy (was Re: Working Group Proposal)
by Benjamin Stuhl