Nick Ing-Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> By all means have a go at Topaz-II
>
> But it won't be 'Perl 6' unless it implements what perl-language
> decides that _is_.
Agreed. It won't even remotely resemble 'Perl 6' (as opposed to Perl
5) until it's in a position to start changing the lexer, at least
several months from now.
> Hmm - personally I cannot imagine how you can maintain XS / API compatibility
> and improve things ...
Well, that's what I hope to explain in my August 15 spec. :-)
> Nor am I sure that the XS API is not one of the things I would not
> have near top of the list for "internals cleanup":
>
> PUSHMARK;
> XPUSHs(sv_2mortal(newSVpv('DeepThought'));
> XPUSHs(sv_2mortal(newSViv(42));
> PUTBACK;
> count = perl_call_method("Consider",G_EVAL);
> SPAGAIN;
> if (count >= 1) {
> answer = SvIV(POPs));
> }
>
> You _want_ to keep that???
Off to the side, out of sight of new code, yes.
--
John Tobey, late nite hacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
\\\ ///
]]] With enough bugs, all eyes are shallow. [[[
/// \\\
