Ken Williams wrote:
> > There are a few loose ends that would be nice to tie up first, or at
> > least during integration: 1) M::B prefers to use ExtUtils::ParseXS,
> > which is a modularized version of a snapshot of xsubpp-we need to
> > figure out what to do with that first: preferable update, integrate,
> > and replace xsubpp with a call thru script.
>
> By the way, I'd *LOVE* to let go of ExtUtils::ParseXS and let p5p
> maintain it. I really have no special expertise (and a dearth even of
> ordinary expertise) when it comes to parsing XS. All I did was
> recognize that xsubpp really needed a modular interface, then did it.
>
> Anyone out there want to claim it? Or can p5p own it somehow?
IIRC ExtUtils::ParseXS is mostly a repackaging of bleadperl's current xsubpp.
So it would be possible to replace it in the core by the version that
has been factored out in ExtUtils::ParseXS. (patches, of course, would help :)
This way we could even add tests for xsubpp.
I haven't checked that the following core changes made their way into
ExtUtils::ParseXS : (Ken?)
Change 18270 by [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 2002/12/09 00:25:26
Subject: [perl #18256] xsubpp can make nested comments in C code
From: Nicholas Clark (via RT) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 7 Nov 2002 14:58:14 -0000
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Change 20650 by [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 2003/08/12 12:32:29
Subject: [PATCH 5.8.1 @20218] xsubpp: wrong code
From: Ilya Zakharevich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 06:19:02 -0700
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
As I will probably be involved in putting ExtUtils::ParseXS into
bleadperl (:p) I suppose I could maintain it on CPAN as well, on behalf
of P5P.
--
It was revealed to me that those things are good which yet are corrupted which
neither if they were supremely good nor unless they were good could be
corrupted.
-- Ulysses
