Language for alfs; was: Re: Request status update

Tapio Kelloniemi persistent.spam at thack.org
Tue Nov 22 03:17:06 PST 2005


On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 08:31:13PM -0500, Thomas Pegg wrote:
 > Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
 > >Gerard Beekmans wrote:
 > >>So...what will it take? I'm not that good of a programmer to take on 
 > >>an entire project like this myself.
 > >>
 > >
 > >Neither are the rest of us, which is why alfs stagnated. We could work 
 > >on something in C slowly... Otherwise, perhaps we could start working on 
 > >something in Perl or Python. It's the 'where to start' with this one 
 > >that flusters me.
 > 
 > C is good. Python might be better (a little easier to work with IMO).

It has been discussed that other things should be dicided before the 
language, but I can't keep myself from saying this.

I'm also interested about alfs, particularly about the package 
management side of the thing. I'm also interested in helping with the 
project, though I'm currently very busy (two little children). However, 
I would suggest that alfs would be written in Ada2005, since it is a 
safe and efficient language and programs written in it tend to be more 
maintainable and readable than those written in C. I know the downsides 
of this, but I feel Ada would be an excellent language for alfs. The downsides
I referred to are: everyone should first learn Ada and everyone should 
install GNAT. Python would be quite a good choice also, particularly for 
writing user interfaces, but I'm a bit concerned of writing daemons that 
run as root in an interpreted language.

-- 
Tapio



More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list