Re: replacing munge-texi with Perl

[Rik]

Michael D Godfrey wrote:
> On 12/16/2009 04:05 PM, Rik wrote:
>> I think we should be open-minded about how munge-texi is implemented. 
>> It is currently written in C++, but I find doing any text processing in
>> C/C++ to be awkward.  We already require Perl for building, so if you
>> think it might be easier to provide the functionality in another
>> language then consider that.
>>
>>   
> I agree with this.  My quick inspection of munge-texi.cc finds that it just
> passes the @example ... @end example code through.  And, using C++
> for more text manipulation is not, I think, a very good idea.  So, a rewrite
> of munge-texi.cc into Perl may be a good start.  Or, should Octave be
> considered?
> 
> Michael
> 
This exchange was from 2009, but I thought I would go ahead and implement
it now that 3.4.0 is out.  Any objections?

--Rik