On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 02:25:10PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > That sentence doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I agree that we've got > well-working code for parsing/running Perl, well, that's Perl :)... Yes, exactly. The `problem' with Perl is that it can be amazingly complex at times. But, as I said, there is no problem, since we have perl... > And how do you produce Perl code? Probably with a printf. /* Steinar */ -- Homepage: http://members.xoom.com/sneeze/
- Re: Print plug-in Daniel . Egger
- Usage of Gnome libs (was: Re: Print plugin) Sven Neumann
- Re: Usage of Gnome libs (was: Re: Print plugin) Marc Lehmann
- Re: Usage of Gnome libs (was: Re: Print plugin) Daniel . Egger
- Re: Print plug-in Marc Lehmann
- Re: Print plug-in Daniel . Egger
- Re: Print plug-in Steinar H. Gunderson
- Re: Print plug-in Daniel . Egger
- Re: Print plug-in Steinar H. Gunderson
- Re: Print plug-in Daniel . Egger
- Re: Print plug-in Steinar H. Gunderson
- Re: Print plug-in Marc Lehmann
- Re: Print plug-in Marc Lehmann
- Macros (was Re: Print plug-in) Ian Boreham
- Re: Print plug-in regis rampnoux
- Re: Print plug-in Marc Lehmann
- Re: Print plug-in Nick Lamb
- Re: Print plug-in Robert L Krawitz
- Re: Print plug-in Tomas Ogren
- Re: Print plug-in Marc Lehmann
- Re: Print plug-in Michael J. Hammel
