Re: Admin tools - idea from left field
On Thu, 11 Feb 1999, Chris Waters wrote:
> Amos Shapira wrote:
> > True (about "Don't go down that road"). But is procedural programming
> > THAT crucial?
>
> If you want something that can (in theory) be used for *all*
> configuration, then yes, procedural programming *is* that crucial. 90%
> or even 99% is NOT good enough.
>
> The FSF was, last I heard, planning to use Guile in this role. Guile
> may not be ready for the job *yet*, but unlike XML or tcl, it should be
> powerful and flexible enough. There was a long discussion on the GNU
> mailing lists about Guile vs. tcl, so lets not rehash that here.
Of course, that's something of a non-sequitur. Guile is not your classic
procedural language. (Although I couldn't say what it was - declarative
but imperative, maybe?).
> If there are problems with the way Guile works *now*, the appropriate
> thing to do is take it up with the FSF. Maybe they'll fix it, maybe
> they'll be persuaded to consider something else. But ignoring them and
> starting from scratch strikes me as a bad approach. We should
> collaborate with them.
Agreed
/----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------\
| Jelibean aka | jules@jellybean.co.uk | 6 Evelyn Rd |
| Jules aka | jules@debian.org | Richmond, Surrey |
| Julian Bean | jmlb2@hermes.cam.ac.uk | TW9 2TF *UK* |
+----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------+
| War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. |
| When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. |
\----------------------------------------------------------------------/
Reply to: