Re: LALR

On Mon, 24 Jul 2000, Chip Salzenberg wrote:

> According to horos:
> > There has to be a tradeoff between the syntax and the embeddability
> > and portability of perl. The best way to make something embedded is
> > by making it regular, clean, and clear; I believe that LALR is the
> > best way to achieve this..
> 
> Well, embeddability is only one of the various goals that Perl is
> stretch{ed,ing} toward.  Larry can't simplify the language too much,
> or it won't have Perl's strengths any more.

Embeddability's also orthogonal to any syntax issues. It makes no
difference *what* perl does, within broad reason, to the embedding app, if
all it needs to do to run some perl code is:

  status = Perl_run_code(&my_interp, "&foo", param_array);

from within it.

Granted there's the whole "We both use the same shared library" issue that
could crop up (depending on the library), but that's not that big a deal
most times in most places.

					Dan