Re: To get things started...

--- Dan Sugalski <[email protected]> wrote:
> At 10:37 AM 11/21/00 +0000, David Grove wrote:
> >Thanks for the clarifications, Simon.
> >
> >Simon Cozens <[email protected]> wrote:
> >If we were simply feeding it perl with a single syntax,
> we could get away
> >with a "one call" scheme. But since we're dealing with
> almost certainly
> >mutually exclusive syntax and semantics, it probably
> needs more
> >information.
> 
> But we are. The call is probably going to be something
> like:
> 
>    status = parse_perl(perl_interpreter *my_interp,
>                         char *script,
>                        struct HIR *end_result,
>                        long flags);

Well, it would (IMHO) make more sense to have
perl6_parse_script (I do tend to follow
{subsystem,verb,object} naming...) take a PerlIO*, so that
it is completely transparent parsing from a file or a
string. This gets almost into embedding issues, though (how
much of a libc does perl6 really need? perl5 now carries
large chunks of one around with it).

> the fact that the script has a "use pythonish;" in it is
> entirely 
> irrelevant--the program calls into the parser, which
> returns a status and 
> possibly a parsed representation of the program. The
> parser gets to deal 
> with all the grotty details.
> 
[snip]

-- BKS

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/