On Wed, 15 Nov 2000, Bill Moseley wrote:
> This is probably more of a Friday topic:
>
> Simon Cozens discusses "Microperl" in the current The Perl Journal.
>
> I don't build mod_rewrite into a mod_perl Apache as I like rewriting with
> mod_perl much better.
At 08:53 17/11/2000 +0800, Gunther Birznieks wrote:
>However, at the same time... I do know that when I go to the Microsoft
>World I get really annoyed at the fact that VBScript syntax means different
>things to different apps including IIS. And that it's so different from VB,
>I can't believe
, which is used when building perl?
>
>Is your question, what about embedding miniperl rather than microperl ? I
>don't know enough about the diffs to decide, and anyway I couldn't do the
>job myself. I was just supporting bill's idea as one that I think could be
>in
At 18:35 16/11/2000 +0100, Fabrice Scemama wrote:
>ok so what about miniperl, which is used when building perl?
Is your question, what about embedding miniperl rather than microperl ? I
don't know enough about the diffs to decide, and anyway I couldn't do the
job myself. I was ju
erful Perl in the ***front-end***
> to replace other modules such as mod_macro and mod_rewrite. This is nothing
> about content generation, but all about all the rest. There size is
> limited, and it would be cool to be able to use microperl (or nanoperl, I
> don't remember if it e
At 18:35 16/11/2000 +0100, Fabrice Scemama wrote:
>ok so what about miniperl, which is used when building perl?
I think using whichever of the small perls that are used during build (or
were thought about to use during build) could potentially be interesting.
-- robin b.
As a computer, I find yo
At 23:23 15/11/2000 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Thu, 16 Nov 2000, Robin Berjon wrote:
>
>> I know what you mean but this is MicroPerl, not Perl. I don't know how much
>> difference it makes, but it's certainly smaller. I'm afraid I can't help
>&g
'perl' belong in the same sentence...
> I know what you mean but this is MicroPerl, not Perl. I don't know how much
> difference it makes, but it's certainly smaller. I'm afraid I can't help
> with embedding it though. I like the idea, not just for rewrites (I&
On Thu, 16 Nov 2000, Robin Berjon wrote:
> I know what you mean but this is MicroPerl, not Perl. I don't know how much
> difference it makes, but it's certainly smaller. I'm afraid I can't help
> with embedding it though. I like the idea, not just for rewrites (I
At 00:12 16/11/2000 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> Nothing against mod_rewrite -- I was just wondering if a small perl could
>> be embedded with out bloating the server too much.
>
>I don't think 'small' and 'perl' belong in the same sentence...
I kn
- Original Message -
From: "Bill Moseley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2000 8:04 PM
Subject: Re: Microperl
> >
> >> I don't build mod_rewrite int
At 07:38 PM 11/15/00 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
>- Original Message -
>From: "Bill Moseley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2000 12:30 PM
>Subject: Microperl
>
>> I don't build mod_r
- Original Message -
From: "Bill Moseley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2000 12:30 PM
Subject: Microperl
> I don't build mod_rewrite into a mod_perl Apache as I like rewriting with
> mod_perl much better. But
This is probably more of a Friday topic:
Simon Cozens discusses "Microperl" in the current The Perl Journal.
I don't build mod_rewrite into a mod_perl Apache as I like rewriting with
mod_perl much better. But it doesn't make much sense to go that route for
a light-weigh
14 matches
Mail list logo
