language choice of alfs
zhouhui at wam.umd.edu
Sun Dec 19 12:24:13 PST 2004
On Sun, Dec 19, 2004 at 08:42:12PM +0100, Boris Buegling wrote:
>On 19.12.2004, Jeremy Huntwork created this extraordinary piece of modern
>>better choice, though I know there were comments made here and there. I
>>don't want to have the language decision based on personal preference,
>>but on what is best for alfs.
>I don't want to sound rude, but as far as I know, we have two coders
>right now, Jamie Bennett and myself, and we both agreed on using C, so
To projects that are supported by volunteers, the actual developers
are valuable. So the final decision will be up to the actual
developers' preferences (as I said before).
>If the other people making suggestions do not actually want to
>take part in development, they shouldn't have a say on what language it
>will be written in.
I never intended to make suggestions. I just put an candidate into the
pond in case the developers (the actual coder) neglected to consider.
And I did that only because the earlier decision was accompanied with
some moot arguments. If it is a coder's choice, then it is not a
decision and doesn't need arguments, because it is as is and there is
nothing to be decide upon.
The decision is always up to the actual developers. But do the
developers would prefer to keep the mailinglist (the dev-list) to them
>It is important that the actual coders feel
>comfortable with the language that is used, not the users. If the
>decision will be against C, I will not be able to participate in coding
>the new tool.
On the other hand, it seems that with python or other languages, some
potential volunteers (that are not comfortable with C) may join or
take more active part in the development. So again, the final decision
should be made mainly based on the availibility of actual coders and
experiences or preferences they have.
More information about the alfs-discuss