At 06:30 PM 10/10/00 -0400, John Porter wrote:
>Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >
> > Perl functions that are called from outside will have to have some sort of
> > interpreter attached to 'em. I can see either a default interpreter, or
> the
> > one they were compiled into being valid as a choice.
> >
> > If there's no hit, I'd love to have all perl functions callable from
> > outside. I'm not sure that'll be the case, though I'm all for it...
>
>As you say, it's a matter of providing context. For some categories
>of functions, the only context necessary will be an interpreter handle.
>For other, presumably lower-level, functions, other gobs of context
>will be needed. If it will be possible to encapsulate that other
>context stuff into a ball, then presumably a handle to that ball
>can be handed to the calling program, for use in future calls.
>But that may be a big "if"...
It may be a huge and insurmountable "if". It may even require the caller to
do some sort of semi-global setup or something. (PERL_SET_CONTEXT, say) It
may turn out that the context required to function will make this proposal
infeasable, though I hope not. (Might be tricky when using it with multiple
active interpreters, but I bet we can do it in the single-interpreter case
at least)
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
