Re: conflict between passes

[nospam@thanx (Ralf S. Engelschall)]

Hello Fritz Zaucker, in a previous mail you wrote:

> > Correct, because ePerl currently doesn't support nested Perl blocks.
> > As you might expect this restriction is not because I just wanted
> > ePerl to support it. It is because it is very difficult to do it in
> > a really useful and backward-compatible manner. I'll start a
> > discussion in a different posting because it bites us a lot of times
> > and I really want to implement the nesting-support now. But we need
> > to make sure we decided the correct approach which is 100%
> > backward-compat, so existing scripts don't get broken.
> 
> How many people are using WML right now? How important the backward
> compatibility? Could it be solved by "activating" the new mode only on
> demand, so that people can still process old stuff, while can also
> create new stuff.
> 
> Of course, I am biased, as I don't have much existing code, yet ...

The WML users are not my problem, because these currently aren't too much.
But I have not to change WML, I have to change ePerl. And ePerl is a
long-available peace of software which has a lot of users. So either we find a
compatible way or we _have_ to use an option in WML.

Greetings,
                                       Ralf S. Engelschall
                                       rse@engelschall.com
                                       www.engelschall.com
______________________________________________________________________
Website META Language (WML)                www.engelschall.com/sw/wml/
Official Support Mailing List                   sw-wml@engelschall.com
Automated List Manager                       majordomo@engelschall.com