Moving on

Stefan Hoffmeister linuxfromscratch.mailinglist at
Wed Jun 13 02:39:43 PDT 2001

: On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 17:52:52 -0700, Andy wrote:

>All the languages above can be rather messy when used incorrectly. 

Wise words :-)

>is used, there should be some design/coding standards laid out before hand,

I suppose you meant to say: Hunt the web for a decent one, then stick to
it and don't cook up variant 57 of whatever is out there.

>I may get some flak for this, but has anyone considered java? 

Java has a problem: It needs quite a bit of infrastructure. AKA the JRE.
And that's *pretty* heavy.

What does ALFS need?

a) XML processing
b) A "light" environment (low overhead)
c) An easy language (low entry barrier)
d) A hackable language (power)

The result of these requirements, IMHO, is one of the "infamous" scripting
languages. None of the compiled languages comes close - neither Object
Pascal, nor Java, nor C, nor (heaven forbid) C++. It's not that I *don't
like* any of these languages - they are, IMHO, simply not suitable for the
effort at hand.

Which options to we have?

  * Python
  * Perl
  * Ruby
  * TCL
  [* And really, really fringe stuff]

TCL is mostly dead. Ruby is nice, but not really popular (yet) except in
Japan, Perl (IMHO) is a mess to read and maintain. [All of this is a gross

Leaves Python - All the necessary (XML) libraries
are there, it's a popular language, it's light, it is available on
multiple architectures, it is a "maintainable language" (it promotes
maintainable code), it can be localised relatively easily through support
for Unicode, it has bindings to Qt. And I would be happy to contribute to
a Python backend :-)

Just some cents.
Unsubscribe: send email to alfs-discuss-request at
and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message

More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list