Re: Is Parrot 1.0 too late? On 4/25/07, Nicholas Clark  wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 06:24:28PM +0100, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
> > Jonathan Worthington wrote:
> > >I guess that doing so will involve re-writing a lot of the current
> > >Configure system and build tools into something that compiles down to
> > >PBC (and then just ship something very basic that can run a PBC).
> > Whoa. I meant, have some kinda miniparrot that can run a PBC but is pure
> > ANSI C or something. Long day...
>
> I like this approach. It feels viable.
>
this has been my vision for some time. miniparrot (or parrotlet,
whatever it will be called) will be c89 at it's core, with the minimum
of platform-specific extensions (only where neccessary.)

one thing we must do is get away from using perl 5's configure
information. this is something we can do now--we just need somebody
with knowledge of perl 5's configure system and somebody with
knowledge of parrot's configure system to get together and Just Do It.

any volunteers? i'd be happy to be the parrot coder. i know enough
about parrot's configure system to be dangerous; i know nothing of
perl's configure system, however.
~jerry

