Andy Rabagliati <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I see more perl interpreters around than python. To install plucker > on a shared BSD box, I had to install a private copy of python 2.0. > perl has usually 'just worked' when I needed it.
"perl is more common" would be a better way of phrasing it. I'm always amazed that perl continues to keep its foothold given some of the abominations and lack of standardisation which it permits. I'm equally amazed that people dismiss my preferred language (scheme) as a minority, when I think it's on about as many systems as python. Then again, this is going miles off-topic now. Let's take this bit off-list if you want to continue it. > The plucker project combines 3 totally separate things :- > 1. Fetch content > 2. Convert / pack data for viewer. > 3. View. > Item 3 is outstanding. Yip Yip - Hooray. Sitescooper, IMHO, does a good job > of 1, and needs some plucker help for item 2 (for the plucker backend only). Well, from what I remember of sitescooper, wouldn't it require yet another interpreter? Has it been ported to Windows yet? Maybe it is better to split the plucker-build into -fetch and -convert instead, though? > However, since I am > not in the position to contribute code at the moment, [...] > I should just shut up.. Yes, I probably should too. -- MJR
