Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from August 2012
[Apparently this message didn't make it to p5p, resending.] On 18 August 2012 09:52, Nicholas Clark <nick@ccl4.org> wrote: [snip] > So I'm not sure what the unique use case is. As someone who did some work on fixing microperl I am (now) also unsure. The main reason I looked at it is it was there already and seemed like an interesting base, but in hindsight it's a bit of a red herring, it provides a very simple way to get something resembling perl running (especially when cross-compiling) but as soon as you want to use signals or various other features that aren't available (sometimes failing in unobvious ways) you either have to customise it or switch to a "real" perl. Given limited resources focusing them on cross-compilation rather than microperl makes sense. It would be great if cross-compilation of a real perl was almost as easy as doing it with microperl. DavidThread Previous | Thread Next