On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 13:14 +0200, Mathias Hasselmann wrote: > Am Montag, den 30.06.2008, 10:31 +0100 schrieb Bastien Nocera: > > On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 01:51 +0000, Stef wrote: > > > Interesting. That's a very valid concern. > > > > > > Although this is a decidedly different case. Vala is used to generate C > > > code for parts of seahorse. This C code is then checked into the > > > repository, and included in the tarballs, so that people can build it > > > without vala. > > > > Right. Some of us have already been there with gob. I don't usually > > think it's worth the pain, but it's your code. I'll start complaining > > when I have to fix bugs in that code. > > Just that gob wasn't half as ambitious as Vala. gob took some kind of > minimum effort approach which lead to the effect that you were mixing > high-level gob and low-level C code all the time. This just felt flaky > and hackish. > > Vala on the other hand tries to provide a complete user experience. > Programming with it feels much better than it ever did with gob. Having > written quite some C# and Java code I think, that writing Vala code > feels as natural as with those languages.
I'm not comparing featuresets. I'm saying it still feels like a pre-processor. It needs native autotools[1] support before it's considered for use in core components. > While your rant has some justification Just where you saw a rant, I don't know. I'd rather you didn't attribute those kind of qualifiers to my messages in the future. [1]: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=472048 _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
