On Thu, Oct 12, 2000 at 03:24:23PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > C's vararg handling sucks in many sublime and profound ways. It does,
> > though, work. If we declare in advance that all C-visible perl functions
> > have an official parameter list of
Dan Sugalski wrote:
> If there's no hit, I'd love to have all perl functions callable from
> outside. I'm not sure that'll be the case, though I'm all for it...
With the 334 infrastructure, the -o option to generate a linkable object
from a perl program/library (RFC 121) will be most do-able: "s
At 03:26 PM 10/13/00 +, David L. Nicol wrote:
>Dan Sugalski wrote:
>
> > If there's no hit, I'd love to have all perl functions callable from
> > outside. I'm not sure that'll be the case, though I'm all for it...
>
>With the 334 infrastructure, the -o option to generate a linkable object
>fro
At 10:16 AM 10/13/00 +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
>On Thu, Oct 12, 2000 at 03:24:23PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > C's vararg handling sucks in many sublime and profound ways. It does,
> > > though, work. If we declare in advance that all C-visi
Dan Sugalski wrote:
>
> At 08:57 PM 10/12/00 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
> >On Thu, Oct 12, 2000 at 03:43:07PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > > Doing this also means someone writing an app with an embedded perl
> > > interpreter can call into perl code the same way as they call into any C
> > > li
