[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Feaping Creature-ism in core Debian Packages

>>"Dale" == Dale Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net> writes:

 Dale> On Wed, 1 Sep 1999, Aaron Van Couwenberghe wrote:

 Dale> Sorry about your sour stomach, but to me, one language is
 Dale> usually as good as another, as long as there is symmetry and
 Dale> completeness to the instruction set.

        Within reason. Most assembly is symmetrical and complete
 ;-). Perl makes things so much easier than sehll in a some cases that
 ;its no contest.

 Dale> Staying within a fixed set of fundamental tools _is_ good integration
 Dale> design.

        And Perl, IMHO, should be part of that set. 

        However, we must make the common case simple; and requiring
 bare bones build platforms does not strike me as a particularily
 common case.

 A little retrospection shows that although many fine, useful software
 systems have been designed by committees and built as part of
 multipart projects, those software systems that have excited
 passionate fans are those that are the products of one or a few
 designing minds, great designers.  Consider Unix, APL, Pascal,
 Modula, the Smalltalk interface, even Fortran; and contrast them with
 Cobol, PL/I, Algol, MVS/370, and MS-DOS. Fred Brooks, Jr.
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E

Reply to: