Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from October 1999
Thanks. I have looked at Expect.pm, but for other purposes. In retrospect, it looks like I could have used it, but Expect wasn't built to do what I would want it to do. Square pegs can sometimes fit in round holes, but I'd rather find or fashion a round peg. The perl regexp engine and threading are described as doing exactly what I want. All I want to do is make reality match the description. Therein lies the difficulty... Rob Sam Tregar wrote: > > On Tue, 26 Oct 1999, Rob Cunningham wrote: > > > I'll add a comment before I start a war. For what I need to do, the best thing > > about perl is its regexp parser, which is more full-featured than anything > > else I can find. It's speed is good too, which is critical. When I needed to > > structure my code to simultaneously parse multiple streams, I could have > > either (a) rewritten my perl objects in C++ (starting over) or (b) made use of > > perl's threading mechanism, and kept most of the code base. I did the latter, > > even though threading was listed as experimental. I plan to work to help make > > the next version of perl threading work, and we have committed some resources > > to help make that happen. > > Naive question: have you looked at Expect.pm? It's interface is raw as > hell, but armed with _Exploring_Expect_ from O'Reilly you should have a > "multiple stream" regexer in a day or two. I like perl threads just like > the next guy but I don't think that betting the farm on them makes much > sense right now. > > -sam -- Dr. Robert K. Cunningham Information System Technology Group rkc@ll.mit.edu MIT Lincoln Laboratory *** My comments, my opinions: my responsibility. PGP key available from http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371Thread Previous | Thread Next