On Sat, 23 Jun 2001, Ken Williams wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Sergeant) wrote:
> >Except that until Inline is included in core, it won't be a widely used
> >way to build performant code, IMHO.
>
> Jarkko offered to put Inline into the core, and Brian actually refused.
> The reason is that he's got a different plan - when a module with Inline
> is installed and the user doesn't already have Inline, a small stub will
> be installed that does the loading. That way, any user back to 5.005
> (maybe even 5.004?) can use Inlined modules automatically, but if it
> goes in the core it's just 5.8 and up.
Yeah I saw that he refused on P5P, but I wasn't aware of the planned way
it would work. So would the Inline stub code have to go in every module
that was distributed that used Inline? Seems an odd plan.
> >That, and XS really isn't that hard.
>
> But it's way harder than it needs to be. There are too many
> housekeeping details that Perl should really have been able to figure
> out for itself.
But then that's weighted against the fact that the number of times you
need to use XS isn't that many. It's not like mod_perl, where it's a
universally applicable technology (in the sphere of web development), it's
more like switch.pm, which is a useful thing to have to a few people who
want those features.
Note: I don't think Inline.pm is a bad idea. I just think it's merely
"interesting" right now.
> >I personally don't buy the benefits of Inline.pm yet. The whole "tweak,
> >run" thing that Brian advocates isn't sold on me, because that's exactly
> >what I do, only it's "tweak, make test"...
>
> I don't think the tweak/run part is the biggest benefit. It's the lack
> of all the XS cruft around C code, and the ability to embed C without
> having to create a whole new module. I've been using it myself to do
> some reverse-engineering of existing C code into Perl, just to make sure
> that I've everything right. The test scripts have been amazingly easy
> to manage using Inline.
Yeah, I'm looking at it from a very different perspective (as a CPAN
module author).
> Also, don't forget that Inline supports other languages too, like Java,
> Assembler, ... (Assembler!).
True. I've used Inline::Java, and that's fantastic. Can't argue with that.
--
<Matt/>
/|| ** Founder and CTO ** ** http://axkit.com/ **
//|| ** AxKit.com Ltd ** ** XML Application Serving **
// || ** http://axkit.org ** ** XSLT, XPathScript, XSP **
// \\| // ** mod_perl news and resources: http://take23.org **
\\//
//\\
// \\
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
