| 1 |
Pieter Van den Abeele wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> There are more advantages to using prolog. But let me point you at some |
| 4 |
> downsides first. Prolog is logic programming, and people tend to avoid |
| 5 |
> logic (and choose other languages like Ada for instance). However, |
| 6 |
> because of its relation to logic, Prolog is often used in reasoning |
| 7 |
> systems, which is in fact what portage is. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Two comments. (Sorry, I'm not subscribed to portage-dev, so this is |
| 10 |
going to the wrong list. Bad Bob!) |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
First, is Prolog embeddable? Would it be possible to do all the I/O, |
| 13 |
UI, etc. in a procedural language, and hand the dependency data off to |
| 14 |
Prolog to do the actual analysis? Would that approach make sense? |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Second, is there anything wrong with Python as an implementation |
| 17 |
language? If you think Python is too slow, think again. On nearly |
| 18 |
every portage operation I do, the CPU is mostly idle -- it's the disk |
| 19 |
that's thrashing (according to gkrellm). The key to improving |
| 20 |
portage's performance is to get it to open fewer files. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Bob Miller K<bob> |
| 24 |
kbobsoft software consulting |
| 25 |
http://kbobsoft.com kbob@××××××××××.com |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives