On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 10:18:57 +0100
Uwe Koloska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Taco Hoekwater wrote:
> > For a larger project with ConTeXt that should not depend on
> > the availability of perl. We needed a very large section of
> > Texutil (--ref and --figures), so it made sense to port the
> > entire program to C.
>
> What about using another script language like TCL that can be
> made into a single file executable? The dependency seems to be
I knew how to get the job done quickly in C, not in TCL.
Also there are some extra runtime requirements like:
"not bigger nor slower than necessary".
The C version runs quite a bit faster. The compiled C code is a
lot smaller than including an interpreter. texutil.c links easily
to tex.c (and tex.rb would have been a bit too much work ;)). etc.
Incidentally: yes, I have a tex.c. That may in fact become GPL-ed
sometime in the future, if and when our finished project deviates
sufficiently from tex.c+texutil.c
_______________________________________________
ntg-context mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
