| 1 |
On Wednesday 29 September 2004 00:16, Christian Parpart wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tuesday 28 September 2004 10:23 pm, Gábor Farkas wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Tue, 2004-09-28 at 21:43 +0200, Christian Parpart wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > As I dislike python (sorry), too, I'd of course use a programming |
| 5 |
> > > language |
| 6 |
> > > that generates native code and supports high level programming |
| 7 |
> > > features like |
| 8 |
> > > C++ :) |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > why is it important that it generates native code? |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> easy, it's faster. however, this is no must of course. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
For most tasks of portage speed really really doesn't matter. There are |
| 15 |
only a few parts of portage where speed is actually an issue and python |
| 16 |
can interface with c/c++ easilly. The only valid reason for not wanting |
| 17 |
python would be the ability to create a standalone (maybe even static) |
| 18 |
version of portage. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Paul |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
ps. Compile times are not hindered at all by the use of python instead of |
| 23 |
for example C |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Paul de Vrieze |
| 27 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 28 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
| 29 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
Archives