You mean that Java like language from Microsoft? Maybe will be known as 
name, but on Unix/Linux platform hard to guess that is really used by 
somebody....and thus having experience....And i believe that any 
incidental user on this platform has the minimum in Perl knowledge.
So, maybe we do a vote on this, whaddaya say? :)

Cozy

Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:

>Except that c# is all those things too, and is also more likely to be
>known to users than ruby.
>
>Jeff
>
>On Fri, 2002-08-30 at 13:45, Roberto Moral wrote:
>  
>
>>what about ruby? :)
>>easy to learn, easy to code, OOP
>>
>>On Fri, 2002-08-30 at 13:05, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Evolution CVS has a means of piping messages to a process and getting
>>>back (via exit code of said process) a value which can be compared
>>>against to find whether or not you want to filter that message.
>>>
>>>At some point we plan on adding a scripting engine to Evolution so that
>>>users can implement their own "wouldn't this be cool" features
>>>themselves, so I'd rather not add Perl now only to remove it later in
>>>favour of some other scripting language. I'd prefer to do it once and do
>>>it The Right Way (tm). Besides, we will probably not want to use Perl
>>>anyway, we'd probably want to use something else (first off, I don't
>>>know perl and to me it's not a very attractive scripting language). I
>>>know Miguel is pushing for c#, which actually kinda sounds like the best
>>>idea. We've also looked at guile and python, but I don't think python's
>>>interpreter was threadsafe or something, and as far as guile goes,
>>>scheme is probably way over the average user's head.
>>>
>>>That said, this will still have to wait until at least after 1.4 is
>>>released, and possibly have to wait longer.
>>>
>>>Jeff
>>>
>>>On Fri, 2002-08-30 at 12:34, Johannes Berg wrote:
>>>      
>>>
>>>>>>Launching a perl process that does alot of searching and evaluating for
>>>>>>every message that comes in could get expensive.
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>Hm, yes, thats true, I didn't think of that.
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>Ok, well, didn't think of that before, but couldn't you simply have some
>>>>kind of process running that accepts mails over a socket? Then you could
>>>>still use the filter system thats already in-place, pipe the message to
>>>>the socket, and send back the reply from that? Then it would save all
>>>>the startup time while not putting everything into evolution...
>>>>Anyway, its OK with me (personally) to put it in, but I can see how it
>>>>might not fit the larger picture.
>>>>
>>>>johannes
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>evolution-hackers maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>-- 
>>>Jeffrey Stedfast
>>>Evolution Hacker - Ximian, Inc.
>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]  - www.ximian.com
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>evolution-hackers maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
>>>      
>>>
>>Roberto Moral
>>SR. UNIX Systems Administrator
>>-------------------------------------
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Tel: 609-514-8513 | cell: 609-346-5601
>>Quantiva, inc.
>>100 Village Blvd. 3rd Floor 
>>Princeton, NJ 08540 
>>    
>>



_______________________________________________
evolution-hackers maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers

Reply via email to