language choice of alfs
jeremy at jenacon.net
Sun Dec 19 09:03:13 PST 2004
Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
>> Sorry, but this isn't the way to go about it. If you want people to
>> take your suggestions seriously, you're going to *have* to give us a
>> reason, or even better, reasons for your preference. We're not going
>> to change our mind simply because you tell us to.
> Well, even though I don't really much of a preference one way or the
> other, I can supply some reasons to use Python instead of C (at least
> for the first round):
> - quicker development time, as there is no need to build Makefiles,
> compile & link, worry about differences between host systems, etc.
> - less time spent on building "infrastructure": data structures,
> locking, multi-threading, networking, etc.
> Obviously all of this can (and has been) done in C, and will be again.
> There are distinct advantages to building a "version 1" or "testbed"
> to work out the protocols, syntaxes, etc. in a language that can do
> more for you. When these things have been worked out, then it can be
> converted to C for performance reasons (if there are any found).
> If you do decide to jump right in building in C, I'd suggest taking a
> long look at both APR and glib2, as they provide a great deal of
> things that an application can use and are platform-agnostic already.
Thanks Kevin. I will take these under consideration.
More information about the alfs-discuss