Re: Perl embedding: trial balloon
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull(a)sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> wrote:
But using "flexibility" and "Mule" in the same
sentence scares me.
Mule is not flexible; we are not yet at a stage where we can have
efficiency in multi-lingual code without extreme discipline.
Efficiency can wait. At the moment I am more interested in tuning the
semantics of Perl as Emacs language and Perl as Lisp extension.
"Discipline" is not a word I associate with Perl[1], and
still less with
Perl programmers.
Touché! Perl is certainly the product of a hectic evolution and has
evolved some rather gross warts, but it is still oh-so-comfy for us
addicts.
That said, it's probably possible to use Perl as a scripting
language
as long as Emchars and bufbytes are carefully kept opaque to the Perl
interpreter. Which will, of course drive Perl programmers up the
Wall. And further increase opposition to Mule, I suspect.
Aside from the issue of regex search and replace, which I assume for
the sake of argument will be hard to get to work with Perl regex, do
you see any other Emacs features that cannot be accessed simply by
calling functions with the usual elisp data types?
>> In this case what you really want is XEmacs as a
loadable
>> module into perl!
John> uh-oh! You read my mind... ;-)
This is a MUCH better idea. Please consider using the external widget
interface instead.
Huh? I want Perl to chew on the text in my buffer, not draw widgets.
Could you please elaborate.