On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 10:40:00AM +0530, Sitaram Chamarty wrote: > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:17 AM, Eric S. Raymond <e...@thyrsus.com> wrote: > > Krzysztof Mazur <krzys...@podlesie.net>: > >> What about embedded systems? git is also useful there. C and shell is > >> everywhere, python is not. > > > > Supposing this is true (and I question it with regard to shell) if you > > tell me how you live without gitk and the Perl pieces I'll play that > > right back at you as your answer. > > gitk is unlikely to be used on an embedded system, the perl pieces more so.
Currently even perl is used only for few very high level commands that are not really needed there. I think that python is ok for pieces that use perl now, but I think that it shouldn't be used for basic porcelain commands. I also don't think that we should prefer python over other languages and especially I don't think that some existing code should be rewritten to python. Even if python is really better, I think that the natural migration is much better. > > I have never understood why people complain about readability in perl. > Just because it uses the ascii charset a bit more? You expect a > mathematician or indeed any scientist to use special symbols to mean > special things, why not programmers? > Because some perl programmers really create write-only code, but the maintainer can just reject that code. It's not the language that create non-readable code, but the programmer. I think that the perl code in git is readable, at least is parts I've seen. Krzysiek -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
