On 16/12/2007, Randy Barlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > David Relson wrote: > > IMHO, python is a very nice object oriented language and C++ is no > > better (unless you need particular features of the language). I > > suspect C++ runs somewhat faster, but that's not the issue here. As I > > understand, portage needs to deal with lots of special cases and > > exceptions to the general rules for updating package. Special cases > > and exceptions always lead to complications and messy code. Switching > > languages doesn't help a situation like this. > > C++ is most certainly going to yield faster programs since it is a > machine compiled language and python is interpreted. But that's not the > idea behind portage. It's all about using the right tools for the job. > I do all my research code in C++ because I need good memory management > and I need speed. But python is far easier to code in, doesn't need to > be compiled, and is pretty dang elegant. It's also pretty platform > independent, which is also nice.
I see you haven't read the portage source-code. It isn't so elegant... And I'm saying this as someone who likes python and thinks it is generally a Good Idea. On 16/12/2007, Hemmann, Volker Armin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > one reason pro phyton and contra c and c++ has always been: segfaults. > > And with c++ comes another one: abi changes. > > Just think about this horror: gcc/libstdc++ update and your package manager > stops working.... Hehehehe. Guess what python is linked against (It doesn't have to be linked against libstdc++, but it usually is)? =P -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
