[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [hackdaworld] hdw scripts


> i dont know - maybe its even slower (?) .. code needs to get compiled
> before it will be executed.

sure. but syntax mistakes are checked at compile time, and when it is
compiled, it will run really fast because since that moment is is machine

> >i though about perl because pattern matching stuff, and regular
> >expressions, and because it is more flexible in programming. Bash is
> >simple and i like it that way.. but some advanced things are limited,
> >things Perl offers..
> >
> what exactly? do we need this?

parsing config files.. for examle. this is the Puzzle script will help a
lot, there is a subroutine for creating build-order-stageX files, this
will improve speed in those cases.. although in my perl implementation
those schemes won't be used.. since i am trying packages config files like
perl modules, also compiled and loaded to bytecode, and kept in variables
and functions.. u will see..

> >it would be a bit hard and will take some time. My experience with perl is
> >not as good. but i think we wont use many perl modules for HDW.. but we
> >could create our own, which could simplify the hdw coding.
> >
> we could create something like modules in bash too ... dont u think so?

sure, that's actually the same way as the current bash system, loading
scripts with ". my_bash_source.sh" or "source my_bash_source.sh".. but i
am doing this with something valled packages in perl. the same concept

> priorities like crossbuilds and deendencies ...

i can't help with crossbuilds i guess. dependencies, cool, now i am trying
to implement some way to check this.. the hdw source dependencies, the
build procedures dependencies and of course the packages deendencies

> yes, as of porting to perl, this is reasonable. also for 1.0, a lot of
> it (beside the package configs maybe) will be writzten from scratch,
> with the old hdw code in mind and all its failures.

sure. i am using the old experience.

> pros of bash:
> - we know it
> - we have experiences
> - we have bsh code and know it to work
> cons:
> - maybe not ideal language to do what hdw should do
> - we are bored, we want to learn perl

slow! one could see this is those scripts that take some time parsing
files contents and that, running a lot of "grep" commands and that.. not
ideal for high-load scripts..

> pros of perl:
> - maybe better language for hdw
> - its new, that means fun
> cons of perl:
> - maybe slower
> - host sstems need perl (ok, not realy a prob)

slower only when compiling.. after that!, it will run as faster as another
binary program. compilation time is not really as slow actually. for me it
is faster, afaikan see.

> no more ideas here, sorry.


> cu then,
> frank

bye. nice stuff about 0.3, thankx fr.



If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailinglist, send mail to
minimalist@hackdaworld.dyndns.org with a subject of:
	unsubscribe hackdaworld