Hi, I'd like to make the ruby version of texexec the default. Are there any strong objections to this? Also, i'd like the stubs to run texmfstart as launcher. For that purpose i'll add a /scripts/context/stubs/[mswin|unix] path with the default stubs that one can copy to some bin path Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Hagen wrote:
I'd like to make the ruby version of texexec the default. Are there any strong objections to this?
Good news! Do it. jk -- Jilani KHALDI http://jkhaldi.oltrelinux.com
On 5/4/06, Hans Hagen
Hi,
I'd like to make the ruby version of texexec the default. Are there any strong objections to this?
Also, i'd like the stubs to run texmfstart as launcher. For that purpose i'll add a /scripts/context/stubs/[mswin|unix] path with the default stubs that one can copy to some bin path
Hans
Fine by me. I've been using the ruby for it seems like forever. Steve -- Steve Grathwohl || Digital Content Developer Duke University Press Journals || +1 919 687 3634 905 W Main St || Durham, NC 27701 USA sgrathwohl@dukeupress.edu
Nice, I don't have to use texmfstart newtexexec.rb my_doc anymore (and don't have to think to make a stub !!! ;) ) What about the perl script for the future ? Hans Hagen a écrit :
Hi,
I'd like to make the ruby version of texexec the default. Are there any strong objections to this?
Also, i'd like the stubs to run texmfstart as launcher. For that purpose i'll add a /scripts/context/stubs/[mswin|unix] path with the default stubs that one can copy to some bin path
Hans
----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
Renaud AUBIN wrote:
Nice, I don't have to use texmfstart newtexexec.rb my_doc anymore (and don't have to think to make a stub !!! ;) )
What about the perl script for the future ?
Hans it will stay around for a while
Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
On Fri, 5 May 2006, Hans Hagen wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to make the ruby version of texexec the default. Are there any strong objections to this?
Is ruby stable with respect to system calls? Is the behaviour consistent on Linux and Windows? Are there active Ruby users on the list who can comment on this? I have debugged my recent failure of metapost graphics to using one-click installer (RC2) for windows. From tex.rb report(command) if getvariable('verbose') ok = system(command) if ok && File.appended(mptex, "\\end\n") then This is failing on my system. Can others using windows test this. 1. Create a file called mp-test-01.mp ------------mp-test-01.mp-------------------- beginfig(1) label(btex This is a test etex, origin) endfig; end ------------------------------------------ 2. Create a file called test.rb -----------test.rb--------------------- def test(command) puts command puts Kernel.system(command) puts $? puts "---------------------------" end test("mpto mp-test-01.mp") test("mpto mp-test-01.mp > mp-test-01-test.tex") ------------------------------------------------- 3. Go to cmd.exe and source setuptex.bat. 4. What is the output of ruby --version ruby test.rb I get. F:\tmp\cont-test\test>ruby --version ruby 1.8.4 (2005-12-24) [i386-mswin32] F:\tmp\cont-test\test>ruby test.rb mpto mp-test-01.mp \gdef\mpxshipout{\shipout\hbox\bgroup \setbox0=\hbox\bgroup} \gdef\stopmpxshipout{\egroup \dimen0=\ht0 \advance\dimen0\dp0 \dimen1=\ht0 \dimen2=\dp0 \setbox0=\hbox\bgroup \box0 \ifnum\dimen0>0 \vrule width1sp height\dimen1 depth\dimen2 \else \vrule width1sp height1sp depth0sp\relax \fi\egroup \ht0=0pt \dp0=0pt \box0 \egroup} \mpxshipout% line 2 mp-test-01.mp This is a test\stopmpxshipout \end{document} true 0 --------------------------- mpto mp-test-01.mp > mp-test-01-test.tex false 0 --------------------------- Notice that the second test is failing. So, in tex.rb, the system command fails and I do not get mp-test-01-test.tex file! Can anyone else using one-click installer for ruby on windows confirm this? Thanks, Aditya -- Aditya Mahajan, EECS Systems, University of Michigan http://www.eecs.umich.edu/~adityam || Ph: 7342624008
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
On Fri, 5 May 2006, Hans Hagen wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to make the ruby version of texexec the default. Are there any strong objections to this?
Is ruby stable with respect to system calls? Is the behaviour consistent on Linux and Windows? Are there active Ruby users on the list who can comment on this?
we run newtexexec on windows and linux without problems (system calls in perl are actually more problematic, or at least in th epast few years differences between platforms have given me many headaches)
I have debugged my recent failure of metapost graphics to using one-click installer (RC2) for windows. From tex.rb
report(command) if getvariable('verbose') ok = system(command) if ok && File.appended(mptex, "\\end\n") then
This is failing on my system. Can others using windows test this.
you mean that ok is false?
1. Create a file called mp-test-01.mp ------------mp-test-01.mp-------------------- beginfig(1) label(btex This is a test etex, origin) endfig; end ------------------------------------------
2. Create a file called test.rb -----------test.rb--------------------- def test(command) puts command puts Kernel.system(command) puts $? puts "---------------------------" end test("mpto mp-test-01.mp") test("mpto mp-test-01.mp > mp-test-01-test.tex") -------------------------------------------------
3. Go to cmd.exe and source setuptex.bat.
4. What is the output of ruby --version ruby test.rb
I get.
F:\tmp\cont-test\test>ruby --version ruby 1.8.4 (2005-12-24) [i386-mswin32]
F:\tmp\cont-test\test>ruby test.rb mpto mp-test-01.mp \gdef\mpxshipout{\shipout\hbox\bgroup \setbox0=\hbox\bgroup} \gdef\stopmpxshipout{\egroup \dimen0=\ht0 \advance\dimen0\dp0 \dimen1=\ht0 \dimen2=\dp0 \setbox0=\hbox\bgroup \box0 \ifnum\dimen0>0 \vrule width1sp height\dimen1 depth\dimen2 \else \vrule width1sp height1sp depth0sp\relax \fi\egroup \ht0=0pt \dp0=0pt \box0 \egroup} \mpxshipout% line 2 mp-test-01.mp This is a test\stopmpxshipout \end{document} true 0 --------------------------- mpto mp-test-01.mp > mp-test-01-test.tex false 0 ---------------------------
Notice that the second test is failing. So, in tex.rb, the system command fails and I do not get mp-test-01-test.tex file! Can anyone else using one-click installer for ruby on windows confirm this?
i must check that (i don't use the one click installer) \ Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
On Sun, 7 May 2006, Hans Hagen wrote:
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
On Fri, 5 May 2006, Hans Hagen wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to make the ruby version of texexec the default. Are there any strong objections to this?
Is ruby stable with respect to system calls? Is the behaviour consistent on Linux and Windows? Are there active Ruby users on the list who can comment on this?
we run newtexexec on windows and linux without problems (system calls in perl are actually more problematic, or at least in th epast few years differences between platforms have given me many headaches)
I have debugged my recent failure of metapost graphics to using one-click installer (RC2) for windows. From tex.rb
report(command) if getvariable('verbose') ok = system(command) if ok && File.appended(mptex, "\\end\n") then
This is failing on my system. Can others using windows test this.
you mean that ok is false?
Yes. For some reason, system(...) returns false whenever there is > in the command. Maybe, in the future, the functionality of mpto can be incorporated into (new)texexec. This is not needed right away, as I managed to get rid of the mess in my system by using cygwin binaries for ruby.
Notice that the second test is failing. So, in tex.rb, the system command fails and I do not get mp-test-01-test.tex file! Can anyone else using one-click installer for ruby on windows confirm this?
i must check that (i don't use the one click installer) \
Turns out that the problem is not with the one click installer. It has to do with the fact that I also had cygwin installed (even though I was using cmd.exe for tests). I have installed cygwin ruby and everything (at least everything related to context) work fine. The conclusion seems to be that for windows either: i) If you do not use cygwin, use any precompiled port of ruby or ii) If you have cygwin, use the cygwin port of ruby or iii) Compile your own binaries. :) I am still confused on why windows ruby have trouble with cgywin being present, but I will leave debugging that to future. Right now, newtexec is working correctly. Aditya -- Aditya Mahajan, EECS Systems, University of Michigan http://www.eecs.umich.edu/~adityam || Ph: 7342624008
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
On Sun, 7 May 2006, Hans Hagen wrote:
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
On Fri, 5 May 2006, Hans Hagen wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to make the ruby version of texexec the default. Are there any strong objections to this?
Is ruby stable with respect to system calls? Is the behaviour consistent on Linux and Windows? Are there active Ruby users on the list who can comment on this?
we run newtexexec on windows and linux without problems (system calls in perl are actually more problematic, or at least in th epast few years differences between platforms have given me many headaches)
I have debugged my recent failure of metapost graphics to using one-click installer (RC2) for windows. From tex.rb
report(command) if getvariable('verbose') ok = system(command) if ok && File.appended(mptex, "\\end\n") then
This is failing on my system. Can others using windows test this.
you mean that ok is false?
Yes. For some reason, system(...) returns false whenever there is > in the command. Maybe, in the future, the functionality of mpto can be incorporated into (new)texexec. This is not needed right away, as I managed to get rid of the mess in my system by using cygwin binaries for ruby.
how about using the code: File.silentdelete(mptex) command = "mpto #{mpname} > #{mptex}" report(command) if getvariable('verbose') ok = system(command) # not "ok && ..." because of potential problem with return code and redirect (>) if FileTest.file?(mptex) && File.appended(mptex, "\\end\n") then so, instead of testing for a return code we test for a file existence
I am still confused on why windows ruby have trouble with cgywin being present, but I will leave debugging that to future. Right now, newtexec is working correctly.
well, the problem is probably cygwin being present -) Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
On Sun, 7 May 2006, Hans Hagen wrote:
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
On Sun, 7 May 2006, Hans Hagen wrote:
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
On Fri, 5 May 2006, Hans Hagen wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to make the ruby version of texexec the default. Are there any strong objections to this?
Is ruby stable with respect to system calls? Is the behaviour consistent on Linux and Windows? Are there active Ruby users on the list who can comment on this?
we run newtexexec on windows and linux without problems (system calls in perl are actually more problematic, or at least in th epast few years differences between platforms have given me many headaches)
I have debugged my recent failure of metapost graphics to using one-click installer (RC2) for windows. From tex.rb
report(command) if getvariable('verbose') ok = system(command) if ok && File.appended(mptex, "\\end\n") then
This is failing on my system. Can others using windows test this.
you mean that ok is false?
Yes. For some reason, system(...) returns false whenever there is > in the command. Maybe, in the future, the functionality of mpto can be incorporated into (new)texexec. This is not needed right away, as I managed to get rid of the mess in my system by using cygwin binaries for ruby.
how about using the code:
File.silentdelete(mptex) command = "mpto #{mpname} > #{mptex}" report(command) if getvariable('verbose') ok = system(command) # not "ok && ..." because of potential problem with return code and redirect (>) if FileTest.file?(mptex) && File.appended(mptex, "\\end\n") then
so, instead of testing for a return code we test for a file existence
That will also not work as the system command fails. mptex file is never creaeted, so FileTest.file?(mptex) will also return false.
I am still confused on why windows ruby have trouble with cgywin being present, but I will leave debugging that to future. Right now, newtexec is working correctly.
well, the problem is probably cygwin being present -)
True. It is a ruby issue. I guess, if one has cygwin installed, then use ruby cygwin. There are some ruby gems that do not work with cygwin-ruby and need the windows-ruby. But, I can manage without them, but not without context :) Aditya -- Aditya Mahajan, EECS Systems, University of Michigan http://www.eecs.umich.edu/~adityam || Ph: 7342624008
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
I get.
F:\tmp\cont-test\test>ruby --version ruby 1.8.4 (2005-12-24) [i386-mswin32]
F:\tmp\cont-test\test>ruby test.rb mpto mp-test-01.mp \gdef\mpxshipout{\shipout\hbox\bgroup \setbox0=\hbox\bgroup} \gdef\stopmpxshipout{\egroup \dimen0=\ht0 \advance\dimen0\dp0 \dimen1=\ht0 \dimen2=\dp0 \setbox0=\hbox\bgroup \box0 \ifnum\dimen0>0 \vrule width1sp height\dimen1 depth\dimen2 \else \vrule width1sp height1sp depth0sp\relax \fi\egroup \ht0=0pt \dp0=0pt \box0 \egroup} \mpxshipout% line 2 mp-test-01.mp This is a test\stopmpxshipout \end{document} true 0 --------------------------- mpto mp-test-01.mp > mp-test-01-test.tex false 0 ---------------------------
Notice that the second test is failing. So, in tex.rb, the system command fails and I do not get mp-test-01-test.tex file! Can anyone else using one-click installer for ruby on windows confirm this?
i get (standard ruby install):
ruby --version ruby 1.8.4 (2005-12-24) [i386-mswin32]
ruby test.rb mpto mp-test-01.mp \gdef\mpxshipout{\shipout\hbox\bgroup \setbox0=\hbox\bgroup} \gdef\stopmpxshipout{\egroup \dimen0=\ht0 \advance\dime \dimen1=\ht0 \dimen2=\dp0 \setbox0=\hbox\bgroup \box0 \ifnum\dimen0>0 \vrule width1sp height\dimen1 depth\ \else \vrule width1sp height1sp depth0sp\relax \fi\egroup \ht0=0pt \dp0=0pt \box0 \egroup} \mpxshipout% line 2 mp-test-01.mp This is a test\stopmpxshipout \end{document} true 0
mpto mp-test-01.mp > mp-test-01-test.tex true 0 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
On Sun, 7 May 2006, Hans Hagen wrote:
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
I get.
F:\tmp\cont-test\test>ruby --version ruby 1.8.4 (2005-12-24) [i386-mswin32]
F:\tmp\cont-test\test>ruby test.rb mpto mp-test-01.mp \gdef\mpxshipout{\shipout\hbox\bgroup \setbox0=\hbox\bgroup} \gdef\stopmpxshipout{\egroup \dimen0=\ht0 \advance\dimen0\dp0 \dimen1=\ht0 \dimen2=\dp0 \setbox0=\hbox\bgroup \box0 \ifnum\dimen0>0 \vrule width1sp height\dimen1 depth\dimen2 \else \vrule width1sp height1sp depth0sp\relax \fi\egroup \ht0=0pt \dp0=0pt \box0 \egroup} \mpxshipout% line 2 mp-test-01.mp This is a test\stopmpxshipout \end{document} true 0 --------------------------- mpto mp-test-01.mp > mp-test-01-test.tex false 0 ---------------------------
Notice that the second test is failing. So, in tex.rb, the system command fails and I do not get mp-test-01-test.tex file! Can anyone else using one-click installer for ruby on windows confirm this?
i get (standard ruby install):
ruby --version ruby 1.8.4 (2005-12-24) [i386-mswin32]
Now, using ruby cygwin port
ruby --version ruby 1.8.4 (2005-12-24) [i386-cygwin]
And the test works fine. I get true for both cases. I do not know what went wrong with the one-click installer. I asked on the ruby mailing list, and others with one-click installer did not have this problem. Must be due some wierd setting on my system. :(
ruby test.rb mpto mp-test-01.mp \gdef\mpxshipout{\shipout\hbox\bgroup \setbox0=\hbox\bgroup} \gdef\stopmpxshipout{\egroup \dimen0=\ht0 \advance\dime \dimen1=\ht0 \dimen2=\dp0 \setbox0=\hbox\bgroup \box0 \ifnum\dimen0>0 \vrule width1sp height\dimen1 depth\ \else \vrule width1sp height1sp depth0sp\relax \fi\egroup \ht0=0pt \dp0=0pt \box0 \egroup} \mpxshipout% line 2 mp-test-01.mp This is a test\stopmpxshipout \end{document} true 0
mpto mp-test-01.mp > mp-test-01-test.tex true 0
-- Aditya Mahajan, EECS Systems, University of Michigan http://www.eecs.umich.edu/~adityam || Ph: 7342624008
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
F:\tmp\cont-test\test>ruby test.rb mpto mp-test-01.mp
actually, i can best write an mpto function in ruby -) Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
On Sun, 7 May 2006, Hans Hagen wrote:
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
F:\tmp\cont-test\test>ruby test.rb mpto mp-test-01.mp
actually, i can best write an mpto function in ruby -)
That will be great. The lesser external dependencies, the better :) Aditya -- Aditya Mahajan, EECS Systems, University of Michigan http://www.eecs.umich.edu/~adityam || Ph: 7342624008
The Aditya's example works OK here (no cygwin installed; not one-click installer, but extracted files + bin path set, ruby 1.9.0 (2005-07-22) [i386-mswin32]). But I remember having problems on computers where cygwin was installed. Even if you run ruby from cmd.exe: if cygwin resides in your path, so does ruby if you have it under cygwin. On 5/7/06, Hans Hagen wrote:
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
F:\tmp\cont-test\test>ruby test.rb mpto mp-test-01.mp
actually, i can best write an mpto function in ruby -)
mpto is only 350 lines long and pretty primitive. If that would solve the "textext" problem, it would be great. I think that most scripts in ConTeXt are much more complex than this one would be. (And you could have better control over "parallelisation" of strings and so on ...) Are there any news about textext and "unknown"s? Thanks, Mojca
hmm, on Fri, May 05, 2006 at 12:03:15AM +0200, Hans Hagen said that
I'd like to make the ruby version of texexec the default. Are there any strong objections to this?
Also, i'd like the stubs to run texmfstart as launcher. For that purpose i'll add a /scripts/context/stubs/[mswin|unix] path with the default stubs that one can copy to some bin path
just out of curiosity, is there a particular reason why ruby was chosen? was something wrong with perl? will the next one (newnewtexexec) be in python? :))) -f -- the sex was so good the neighbors lit cigarettes.
frantisek holop wrote:
hmm, on Fri, May 05, 2006 at 12:03:15AM +0200, Hans Hagen said that
I'd like to make the ruby version of texexec the default. Are there any strong objections to this?
Also, i'd like the stubs to run texmfstart as launcher. For that purpose i'll add a /scripts/context/stubs/[mswin|unix] path with the default stubs that one can copy to some bin path
just out of curiosity, is there a particular reason why ruby was chosen? was something wrong with perl? will the next one (newnewtexexec) be in python? :)))
it's all a matter of taste. i like ruby and after working with it for a whiel decided that i could write better / cleaner code in ruby than in perl; i skipped python (didn't like some of its syntax); i'll stick to ruby (and later on lua for embedded tex stuff, but that's another story); so, there wil not be a texexec.py Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
On Thursday 04 May 2006 18:03, Hans Hagen wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to make the ruby version of texexec the default. Are there any strong objections to this?
Also, i'd like the stubs to run texmfstart as launcher. For that purpose i'll add a /scripts/context/stubs/[mswin|unix] path with the default stubs that one can copy to some bin path
Hans
----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
| www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
I am of the school of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Ruby seems to be one of those small-market languages like Lisp etc. and I worry when important software becomes dependent on such things. For example Xindy is dependent on I think Lisp and that has handicapped its development and acceptance majorly. If Slackware decides not to include Ruby any more then I will have a problem. Of course as the developer you need to use the tool that fits your hand best. And I did test out newtexexec (through a clumsy call) and it seemed to work ok. I think the messages are different however. I will have to do a differential to make sure. Are there things that can be done in Ruby that can't be done conveniently in Perl? Conversely, are there things that can be done in Perl that are more elegant than what can be done in Ruby? I am thinking of perl/Tk for a nice gui interface for example. Just worrying out loud. -- John Culleton Books with answers to marketing and publishing questions: http://wexfordpress.com/tex/shortlist.pdf Book coaches, consultants and packagers: http://wexfordpress.com/tex/packagers.pdf
John R. Culleton wrote:
On Thursday 04 May 2006 18:03, Hans Hagen wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to make the ruby version of texexec the default. Are there any strong objections to this?
Also, i'd like the stubs to run texmfstart as launcher. For that purpose i'll add a /scripts/context/stubs/[mswin|unix] path with the default stubs that one can copy to some bin path
Hans
----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
| www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
I am of the school of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Ruby seems to be one of those small-market languages like Lisp etc. and I worry when important software becomes dependent on such things. For example Xindy is dependent on I think Lisp and that has handicapped its development and acceptance majorly. If Slackware decides not to include Ruby any more then I will have a problem.
actually, i think that in the end slackware will have a problem; i remember that when we found out that the mac didn't carry ruby, someone contacted the right people and it was in the next upgrade. also, one sees major apps showing up done in ruby, so it's a matter of time; if one sees what gets installed by default (when installing linux), i wonder why ruby isn't; on windows i think one always has to install languages (what worries me more is that one cannot depend on e.g. unzip being present)
Of course as the developer you need to use the tool that fits your hand best. And I did test out newtexexec (through a clumsy call) and it seemed to work ok. I think the messages are different however. I will have to do a differential to make sure.
i used the ruby variant for quite some time now and its ok (and even better that the original)
Are there things that can be done in Ruby that can't be done conveniently in Perl? Conversely, are there things that can be done in Perl that are more elegant than what can be done in Ruby? I am thinking of perl/Tk for a nice gui interface for example.
they are all lanuages, and they all come with libraries (nowadays most programming languages come with similar libraries) so that is no problem tk is supported in perl, python and ruby personally i consider programming in ruby to be more elegant so in the end all perl stuff will be converted (just take a look in context/ruby, there are already quite some scripts there)
Just worrying out loud.
no problem, Hans -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
participants (10)
-
Aditya Mahajan -
frantisek holop -
Hans Hagen -
Jilani Khaldi -
John R. Culleton -
luigi scarso -
Mojca Miklavec -
Renaud AUBIN -
Steve Grathwohl -
Steve Peter