in reply to Re^3: Disputation of g0n on the power and efficacy of XS
in thread Disputation of g0n on the power and efficacy of XS
I think you're missing the point. The point is, when I have two dozen XS-based modules to install on multiple machines, especially of different architecture (Windows, Unix, Linux, Mac, mainframe) where each architecture comes with different levels of different supporting code (if it comes with it at all, e.g., Linux comes with expat, but AIX doesn't), that's a lot to pull together. Yes, it can be done. It's just a reasonable amount of effort to do.
And then you get situations where you have to fight a beaurocracy to get it done on hundreds of machines that you don't otherwise even have access to, but they need something to use the perl software you wrote depending on it (directly or indirectly). Not that this is incredibly different if we were to be writing in C - depending on expat is depending on expat. However, there are way more people who understand C/C++ limitations and are willing to work with them than there are for perl - so it's just a struggle.
And, of course, in C/C++, I find people are often less willing to reuse existing code, preferring to reinvent wheels. So then the issue doesn't come up as often.
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
Re^5: Disputation of g0n on the power and efficacy of XS
by brian_d_foy (Abbot) on Apr 21, 2005 at 05:42 UTC | |
by Tanktalus (Canon) on Apr 21, 2005 at 14:04 UTC |