No, absolutely not. It is not set in stone. It is just I know go, I already wrote the implementation with my first proposal (replacement with an exec) and this proposal is just a natural enhancements of the current codebase.
So if I have to implement it (and I will do, if the community agrees) I will use Go. Yup, rust looks like a great language but I have to hand over the coding to someone else if it is chosen as the implementation language. -- Michele Sciabarra [email protected] On Thu, Feb 15, 2018, at 9:34 PM, Markus Thoemmes wrote: > Hi, > > sounds very well thought out. The raised concerns all make sense to me > and the proposal (without thinking too deeply into it) seems to fit the > "binary executable" world quite nice (logs to stderr, payload to > stdout). > > One comment: You said: "Go of course". Why's that so set in stone? Could > we squeeze out even more by falling back to something like Rust, which > doesn't even contain a GC but is reasonably easy to manage and read by > anyone. > > Cheers, > Markus >
