Matthew O. Persico wrote:
> Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>
>> Strictly speaking, there is no need to put Inline into the 5.7 tree,
>> though, since whatever goes in there probably should stay there all
>> the way till 5.8.0 (putting it in and taking it out before the 5.8.0
>> is kind of wasted work from my perspective, and I live by Larry's
>> Virtue #1...) You can still work with the VMS folks, for example,
>> to make Inline more portable, there's no need for the Inline to be
>> in the core for that.
>
>
> Hmm. Seems to me you folks are picking the wrong target. Wasn't one of
> the goals of Perl 6.0 to implement a simpler way than XS to integrate
> Perl with other languages? If that was one of the 347 (sic?) RFDs that
> Larry is reading, then I think THIS is the answer. It may have to be
> modified based on whatever the new internals look like but maybe the
> internals folks for 6.0 should be thinking in terms of using Inline:: as
> the API for whatever they cook up.
If Damian Conway's recent talks on the State of Perl6 are anywhere on
target, RFC 270 ( http://dev.perl.org/rfc/270.pod ) is being given
serious consideration.
Cheers, Brian
