Michael Roberts wrote:
>
> Pardon my naivete, but besides the fact that using Inline gives you a
> module dependency is there *any* reason not to use Inline for a CPAN module
> at this point? Especially given that the only Perl installations without
> an associated compiler are probably going to be Windows and Brian has
> provision for binary-only distributions? Does the XS route give me any
> flexibility over Inline automation that I would really need?
>
> Don't glare at me like that, Brian. I don't really *mean* to question the
> canon.
Be bold. Take the Inline road. Do you really think I'll let you down?
Seriously. Did you read my previous thread? Read it again:
> As I see it there are four issues slowing Inline from taking over the
> (extension writing) world:
> 1) Inline is required at the installer's end.
> 2) There is a small but not completely insignificant startup penalty
> when using Inline.
> 3) Inline makes a few assumptions about the file system. This currently
> prevents it from being used in software that creates standalone
> Perl-based executables. (like ActiveState's PerlApp for instance :)
> 4) The remaining problem, of course, is when and how to get Inline into
> the core. I had a chat (on IRC) with Simon last night. I was
> dissatisfied at the prospect of putting Inline into 5.8.0 and leaving
> the other Perl versions to suffer. I'll point out (at the risk of
> starting a flame war) Inline currently supports all versions since
> 5.005_03 equally, and for better or worse, the real world is all over
> that map.
>
> I'll fast-forward to the ending now... I've figured out a way to resolve
> all of the above issues. It turns out that there's no need to put Inline
> into the core at all. I've figured out a way that extension modules can
> be developed with Inline and shipped to users who've never even heard
> of, let alone installed, Inline.pm. And it will work equally well for
> all versions of Perl that Inline supports.
> ...
> As a final note to budding Inline-based module authors, "None of this
> should prevent you from authoring with release 0.40". Your modules will
> simply require Inline, and that's not such a bad thing IMO :)
Even those who had objections to this, now understand and support it. I
think you are doing the community a service by using Inline. They will
be able to modify and extend your code with the utmost ease. You will be
an example to millions. And you'll be in good company. Damian Conway has
volunteered to write an Inline based module. Others will follow.
I believe that soon after the 0.50 release ships, the Inline project
will be complete. It will simply work everywhere XS works.
On the other hand, the *Inline-Dev* projects will just be starting...
Cheers, Brian
--
perl -le 'use Inline C=>q{SV*JAxH(char*x){return newSVpvf
("Just Another %s Hacker",x);}};print JAxH+Perl'
