On 25/05/04 12:43 +1000, Sisyphus wrote:
> nadim wrote:
>
> >
> >I remember that I pointed out a problem with Parse::RecDescent which was
> >way too slow for any serious work (for me). One of the answers I got then
> >was that Inline was made for "simple" stuff and in that case P::RD would
> >be enough. I still fail to see why Inline would be for simple stuff.
> >
>
> Replacing P::RD with something faster is, imo, the most important
> improvement that could be made to Inline. (Yep - my Inline scripts have
> gotten big enough that the 'parse' stage is becoming quite a drag.)
> There was some discussion about a potential P::RD replacement candidate
> a couple of years ago wasn't there ? I forget what it was ....
Um, am I missing something or is this not the solution that 0.44 has
always provided you:
use Inline C => DATA => USING => "ParseRegExp", ...
Inline::C comes with two parsers, one P::RD and one RegExp. The RegExp
one is meant to become default in the next release. But it seems nobody
knows about it...
> I've also seen instances where people have expressed that view that
> Inline is for simple stuff .... though I've never seen any evidence to
> support it. Even with P::RD slowing it down, it seems to me that
> Inline is still capable of performing serious tasks.
my $0.02:
Inline has seemed to be stable enough for the general populace, that I
have diverted my attention to my other dozen large scale projects. I'm
kind of letting the community drive at this point. No news is good
news, etc.
Inline is still important to me, it's just down on the stack on
autopilot for now. And sometimes *not* working on a project can be a
good thing. In this case, it turns out, that many of the goals for 0.50
have become less important because of other awesome new tools like
ExtUtils::AutoInstall and Module::Install. What I have found is that if
I delay coding my ideas long enough, Autrijus Tang will code them for
me!! ;) The point is that the landscape evolves on its own and sometimes
you get stuff for free.
So when will I work on Inline again? To be honest, it will happen as
soon as I start writing my own C based modules. This *will* happen, but
C is an optimization, and one should never optimize prematurely if you
get my drift.
As far as the book goes... I never really got that excited about the
Inline book. I don't think it was as important to the world as the
software I'm working on. It would have been a (very hard earned) feather
in my cap, and little more. Inline is just fine without a book. At least
for right now. I actually do hope to write one or two tech books in the
future, but the timing and reasons have to be right.
Since I don't participate on the list much these days (I do read all the
mail) I just wanted to thank those in the Inline community who keep the
project going. It's really great to see a project "leave the nest" so to
speak. The reason it can stand on its own, is because of all of you.
Thank You!!
Cheers, Brian
>
> Cheers,
> Rob
>
>
> --
> Any emails containing attachments will be deleted from my ISP's mail
> server before I even get to see them. If you wish to email me an
> attachment, please provide advance warning so that I can make the
> necessary arrangements.
