Bill wrote:
> Now, for those still reading... some technical issues.
> Have you SEEN perl's OO code?? I have actually compared perl 
> and python
> objects, and even my anti-python friends (they are decreasing very
> quickly) admit that perl's handling of objects stinks to high 
> orbit. It
> may be a Object publishing environment, but it still needs 
> topublish one
> basic type of object. Here is where I think we will see the 
> biggest part
> of the prblems on the technical side. Perl's objects are of a 
> lesser ...
> refinement than Python's, and interfacing the two directly is not
> pretty, nor easy. That is why I favor supporting perl through 
> CORBA, let
> an independant system designed specifically for that 'type' of thing
> handle it.

It's funny that you bring this up.  One of the really interesting things
about this project so far is learning about Perl internals.  You're
description is, apparently, pretty accurate.

However, the way we've done this mitigates the issue in two ways.

First, Perl doesn't need objects to fulfill its job.  Functions are
bound to the object system.  All the real stuff (persistence,
transactions, etc.) is in Zope (read: Python).  Honestly, the goal
really _is_ to make Perl a scripting language for Zope, not an
implementation language!  The contract says so!

Second, ActiveState will work on improving facilities missing in Perl,
such as reflection, to support our requirements (e.g. sniffing at method


Zope maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - )

Reply via email to