> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2000 12:09 PM > > On Sat, 16 Dec 2000, Sascha Schumann wrote: > > > I had too much free time today, so I created make_export.awk. > > During that I noticed that I either lack some awk knowledge > > or that the awk's expression mechanism lacks a useful feature > > (backreferencing). I've worked around that by using two sub's > > in the respective block. > > I dislike this idea. I realize (now) that awk is available on Windows, > but Perl is already required to build Apache on Windows, and all of a > sudden we are going to add the requirement of awk too. Why? We already > require Perl on every platform when building Apache, but we do not > currently require awk.
Do we? For what? I couldn't care less which 'free intepreter' we use. Perl is a matter of convenience for Win32 to rewrite .dsp's. I'd expect a greater number of users to be familiar with perl than awk, but that's probably neither here nor there. > Unless there is a really good reason to change this to awk, I would much > rather use Perl. That is a -1 (vote not veto) for the awk version. I > would also point out that we have always expected developers to have Perl > installed on their machines, and people who download the binary will not > need it. Actually this brings up a huge issue. I'm currently battling rewrites in the Windows .msi installer, trying to make a 'native' extension for this job, or we will have to bundle 1. our own rewriter, or 2. someone else's rewriter. If we bundle gnu awk, we just fell into a deep pit we aren't going to succeed in crawling out of :-(
