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

Re: when and why did python(-minimal) become essential?

Le samedi 28 janvier 2006 à 21:13 -0600, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
> > Sorry, but there's a whole new generation of Debian developers here
> > that simply won't develop anything in perl, just because perl looks
> > too complex and cryptic to us.
>         I see. I am not sure how I can respond to this without seeming
>  to be insulting. We are trying to build the best OS out there, and
>  ifone of the most popular glue languages is too abstruse for people,
>  perhaps they should, umm, reconsider their qualifications?

You don't only *seem* to be insulting. Just because people don't want to
waste their time with an inefficient language, you label them as
incompetent? Guess what, some people have better to do than learning
perl or C++. If you're going to refuse contributions from people who
don't understand perl, I'm not sure you're going to build the best OS
out there - only the best perl OS.

> 	Heck no. We definitely need ruby, for the whole OO thang that
>  python messed up ;). And while we are talking OO, how about a teensy
>  smalltalk interpreter?
>         Or how about some haskell, so we can _prove_ maintainer
>  scripts are correct? I mean, surely we can make a strong case for
>  haskell, which is a different kinda beast than procedural languages.
>         Or Scheme. Oooh, scheme.

Thank you, I too can provide a list of languages. What are you trying to

If a good number of scripts that would be worth including in the base
system were written in haskell or scheme, I would be the first one to
support that inclusion. Guess what? Such scripts don't exist, because
these languages are currently not suitable for these tasks.
 .''`.           Josselin Mouette        /\./\
: :' :           josselin.mouette@ens-lyon.org
`. `'                        joss@debian.org
  `-  Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=

Reply to: