Craig A. Berry wrote:
At 12:19 AM -0400 6/7/04, John Malmberg wrote:
Craig A. Berry wrote:
To compile Perl directly, you need to interface to a back end code
generator.
True, but we need to define "code" here. For Perl, it generally
means bytecode that is run on the Perl bytecode engine, which is
At 12:19 AM -0400 6/7/04, John Malmberg wrote:
>Craig A. Berry wrote:
>>
>> http://www.perldoc.com/perl5.8.4/pod/perlcompile.html
>>
>>I think what this gets you in that subset of cases for which it even
>>works is a Perl op-tree implemented in C. In other words, you get a
>>C program that execute
Craig A. Berry wrote:
At 11:40 AM +0200 6/2/04, Willem Grooters wrote:
http://www.perldoc.com/perl5.8.4/pod/perlcompile.html
I think what this gets you in that subset of cases for which it even
works is a Perl op-tree implemented in C. In other words, you get a
C program that executes the parti
>For efficiency, I've snipped quite a bit :-).
>
>> >>What you ask for is a real PERL compiler that creates VMS-compliant
objects, isn't it?
>>>
>>>Yes, or even simply a "builder" that could compile and link an
>>>entire set pf perl scripts into an image that one could invoke with
>>>RUN.
>
>Pe
LS,
For windows & Unix there are packaging tools that get a perl interpreter + source
(zipped) + needed modules (also zipped) together in one "executable". What it gets you
is execute a perl script on a system that has no perl installed. (perl2exe).
To use spamassassin effectively there also ex
At 11:40 AM +0200 6/2/04, Willem Grooters wrote:
>Sorry, something went wrong and a reply was sent to the original sender
>in stead of the list.
The Perl lists give you reply to sender by default; you need to
explicitly choose reply to all to reply to the list.
>So this is our communication. For
Sorry, something went wrong and a reply was sent to the original sender
in stead of the list.
So this is our communication. For completeness, I kept all of the
original answer.
>
>>What you ask for is a real PERL compiler that creates VMS-compliant
>>objects, isn't it?
>
>Yes, or even simply a "b
