On Mon, 11 Feb 2019, at 08:49, Daniel Silverstone wrote:
On Sun, Feb 10, 2019 at 18:14:26 -0500, Richard Ipsum wrote:
> Perhaps slightly odd to post this here, but I know for certain that there are
> two yarn devs on this list and one contributor.
As one of those, I don't mind :D
> Recently I've been playing with OpenBSD and found that I wasn't able to run
> my yarns there, so I wrote Tiny Yarn, which is a quite hacky implementation
> in Lua/C.
Interesting. What in C did you need which Luxio et al. didn't provide for you?
I could have used Luxio, but I wanted to keep dependencies to an absolute minimum,
this started off as a pure C project but I decided I didn't want to do string handling
> If you have any feedback or suggestions I'd love to hear them, I also made
> use of some of the build elements from Luxio, so thank you for that.
I think you helped with those anyway, and providing you're licence-compliant I
have no issue with you taking them for your project :D
> Though it works for all the yarns I'm using, I'm quite certain there will
> bugs and it will break on other yarns, I'd be very interested in hearing
> about any bugs.
If it works for Gitano's yarns then that's the majority of the stuff I run
under yarn as it is. So it sounds like you've done a good job.
I've still to test this, there is one caveat that it doesn't support PCREs,
so I had to convert my implementation regexes into POSIX REs.
> Code is here: http://violaine.xyz/git/tinyyarn.git/
I will pop that in my bookmarks to take a look at. Eventually I'd like to
extend rsyarn to support the full design Lars and I came up with a while back
and it's possible
that might be a useful reference for you to decide how much work it'd be to
ensure your tinyyarn becomes, or remains, "normative" should we undertake
the work outlined in that post. Of course, that post was nearly 2 years
ago now, so we're pretty slow off the mark :D