On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 09:50:19AM -0800, Christoph Otto wrote: > [...] The problem is that there's no NQP/Rakudo performance > improvement to be had for that extra work, so the biggest > benefit is the nice feeling of using a current NQP.
Well, there may also be a benefit of easier maintainability and robustness of the tools. But thus far I still worry about having a confusing or fragile build process. IMO, those who feel strongly that the tools should be written in NQP (and thus NQP is a build dependency for Parrot/NQP/Rakudo) need to describe the resulting build system in more detail. That is, what files are checked into the Parrot repo, what files get generated, and where they all end up in the resulting install tree. Handwaving it as "problem already solved" isn't sufficient detail, because NQP poses many more places where unintended conflicts can arise (e.g., the nqp_ops libraries, PMC libraries, and setting libraries, which nqp-rx didn't have). Pm _______________________________________________ http://lists.parrot.org/mailman/listinfo/parrot-dev
