On Mon, 10 Aug 1998, Chris Nandor wrote: > At 11.00 -0400 1998.08.10, Jeff at MacTech wrote: > >code. And if you write it in C++ using a framework, it will be even less > >work. This is just the impresssion that I get. > > That is a very good and important point, however, consider that in some > ways you can test Perl code more easily than C code. Make a change, hit > command-shift-R. > > And there is room for people like you, me, Alan, etc. to write methods to > make access easier. Right now it is kinda complicated, and that can > change. AppleEvents are getting easier, I think (with > Mac::AppleEvents::Simple), and will likely get easier still. Something > similar can be done with GUI calls. rolling up sleeves...anybody thought about porting PowerPlant? :) Actually, though I meant it as a joke, are there any reasons it _couldn't_ be done, other than common sense? I suppose FaceSpan, in AppleScript, might be a better candidate for porting; but it has closed source. Can MacPerl talk to the MacOS Runtime for Java in any other way than AppleEvents? I'm not sure what I have in mind...but MRJ might come closest to a universally installed "compiler" on Macs. One could use it as an XS handler, maybe. And what could be hipper than Perl and Java, unless it would be XML, Perl, and Java? ;^) Or, consider, what would HyperCard/SuperCard be like, if it used Perl as its scripting language (PerlTalk?). Much harder for novices, no doubt, but think of the power! -- MattLangford ***** Want to unsubscribe from this list? ***** Send mail with body "unsubscribe" to mac-perl-request@iis.ee.ethz.ch