[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

Re: Calling Perl Modules from ruby

Doug Phillips

6/5/2007 3:07:00 PM

> I'm trying to convert what we have in Perl to Ruby, but the
> folks who maintain the perl are nervous of a re-write...let
> alone the time it would take to do it.
>
> This is custom perl stuff. I don't believe it is
> proprietary, however.

If what you have in perl is working, why go through the hassle to
rewrite?
4 Answers

barjunk

6/6/2007 5:03:00 PM

0

On Jun 5, 7:07 am, "Doug Phillips" <DPhill...@cybergroup.com> wrote:
> > I'm trying to convert what we have inPerlto Ruby, but the
> > folks who maintain theperlare nervous of a re-write...let
> > alone the time it would take to do it.
>
> > This is customperlstuff. I don't believe it is
> > proprietary, however.
>
> If what you have inperlis working, why go through the hassle to
> rewrite?


Actually what I would prefer to do is to call the perl modules
directly from my ruby stuff. The only way I can see to do this
currently is using a system command.

I guess I was hoping there was a way to "talk" to the perl modules
directly. Seems like a pipe dream at the moment.

Mike B.

Sean T Allen

6/6/2007 8:28:00 PM

0

there is this switch might get you started as well:

http://code.google.com/p/...

barjunk wrote:
> On Jun 5, 7:07 am, "Doug Phillips" <DPhill...@cybergroup.com> wrote:
>
>>> I'm trying to convert what we have inPerlto Ruby, but the
>>> folks who maintain theperlare nervous of a re-write...let
>>> alone the time it would take to do it.
>>>
>>> This is customperlstuff. I don't believe it is
>>> proprietary, however.
>>>
>> If what you have inperlis working, why go through the hassle to
>> rewrite?
>>
>
>
> Actually what I would prefer to do is to call the perl modules
> directly from my ruby stuff. The only way I can see to do this
> currently is using a system command.
>
> I guess I was hoping there was a way to "talk" to the perl modules
> directly. Seems like a pipe dream at the moment.
>
> Mike B.
>
>
>


barjunk

6/6/2007 9:29:00 PM

0

On Jun 6, 12:28 pm, Sean T Allen <s...@ardishealth.com> wrote:
> there is this switch might get you started as well:
>
> http://code.google.com/p/...
>
> barjunk wrote:
> > On Jun 5, 7:07 am, "Doug Phillips" <DPhill...@cybergroup.com> wrote:
>
> >>> I'm trying to convert what we have inPerlto Ruby, but the
> >>> folks who maintain theperlare nervous of a re-write...let
> >>> alone the time it would take to do it.
>
> >>> This is customperlstuff. I don't believe it is
> >>> proprietary, however.
>
> >> If what you have inperlis working, why go through the hassle to
> >> rewrite?
>
> > Actually what I would prefer to do is to call the perl modules
> > directly from my ruby stuff. The only way I can see to do this
> > currently is using a system command.
>
> > I guess I was hoping there was a way to "talk" to the perl modules
> > directly. Seems like a pipe dream at the moment.
>
> > Mike B.

This looks interesting. Thanks for point it out. Have you ever used
it yourself?

Mike B.

Sean T Allen

6/9/2007 2:40:00 AM

0

barjunk wrote:
> On Jun 6, 12:28 pm, Sean T Allen <s...@ardishealth.com> wrote:
>
>> there is this switch might get you started as well:
>>
>> http://code.google.com/p/...
>>
>> barjunk wrote:
>>
>>> On Jun 5, 7:07 am, "Doug Phillips" <DPhill...@cybergroup.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I'm trying to convert what we have inPerlto Ruby, but the
>>>>> folks who maintain theperlare nervous of a re-write...let
>>>>> alone the time it would take to do it.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is customperlstuff. I don't believe it is
>>>>> proprietary, however.
>>>>>
>>>> If what you have inperlis working, why go through the hassle to
>>>> rewrite?
>>>>
>>> Actually what I would prefer to do is to call the perl modules
>>> directly from my ruby stuff. The only way I can see to do this
>>> currently is using a system command.
>>>
>>> I guess I was hoping there was a way to "talk" to the perl modules
>>> directly. Seems like a pipe dream at the moment.
>>>
>>> Mike B.
>>>
>
> This looks interesting. Thanks for point it out. Have you ever used
> it yourself?
>
> Mike B.
>
>
>
no i haven't. we haven't had the need to yet.