On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 09:22:53AM +0100, Peter J. Acklam wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Rolsky) wrote: > > > Joshua Hoblitt wrote: > > > > > Are you planning on requiring XS for DT or also maintaining a > > > pure Perl implementation? > > > > Good question. I could maintain the pure Perl code as well, but > > it's kind of a pain. I think that if the DateTime project is to > > succeed, speed will count, so I'm kind of leaning towards just > > requiring XS, which I know is a pain for some OS's > > I don't see any point in making DateTime run faster unless someone > has complained about it being too slow.
Agreed. And then first try to make the perl code faster. Tim. > Most of the computers I administer don't have C compilers (the run > Solaris). Requiring XS makes DateTime useless. I thought > DateTime was a great idea, but now I hope the older Date and Time > modules will be maintained so I can use them -- or I'll have to > roll my own modules. This leaves me at the point I was before the > DateTime project started. *groan* > > Peter > > -- > #!/local/bin/perl5 -wp -*- mode: cperl; coding: iso-8859-1; -*- > # matlab comment stripper (strips comments from Matlab m-files) > s/^((?:(?:[])}\w.]'+|[^'%])+|'[^'\n]*(?:''[^'\n]*)*')*).*/$1/x;
