RE: A companion interpreted language for @Filter clause

[mzukowski]

> What about a call to a specific language instead of to 
> "whatever is out
> there"? Let's choose a profitable interpreted language, 
> preferably a text
> processing one; maybe Awk or (sorry) Python or (I beg your 
> pardon) Perl or
> (God save us) Java.
> A lot of them are available in virtually every know system, 
> and they are
> powerful and general enough to solve any problem. In most 
> systems they may
> be somehow linked so that to optimize calls, too. No more 
> compatibility
> problems and some efficiency improvement too, maybe.

It isn't too hard to embed an interpreter for those languages which are
embeddable like Tcl, Python and Perl.  But it is a bit of work and requires
extra compilation, and of course is difficult to please everybody by
choosing only one.

I find that using Python to generate Lout code is pretty fun and extremely
flexible.  

Monty