me: > Max Battcher wrote: > > Ultimately, however I think worrying about libdarcs in this case is a > > red herring: the first focus should be performance. Given CLI commands > > that run nearly as fast as their git counterparts is probably more > > useful to everyone involved (even with shell-scripting > > interop/marshalling concerns). > > I thought this an important enough paragraph to republish above the > fold. It seems to me that a good portion of the call for a libdarcs is > centered around performance/marshalling issues. It seems to me that if
No, that makes no sense. A better argument is that we get a safer/typed API, and can guarantee the code will be callable at runtime -- since we linked it in statically -- rather than relying on $PATH. -- Don _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
