On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 13:58, Dirk Joos <d...@dirkundsari.de> wrote: > And sorry for asking again. Why isn't it planned?
Because... there is no plan (at least I don't have one). > Don' t you think that this would be an important feature? No, I don't think so. > What could be a workaround? Perhaps packing each script separately and then > calling the packed stuff instead of using a second perl interpreter? Sure, if your're willing to accept the runtime overhead. It also means that you would have two variants of your program - one when running normaly, the other when running packed. Cheers, Roderich
