On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 5:21 PM, rantingrick <rantingr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 2, 6:38 pm, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: > [...] > > It takes work to suit your API to a different language. Let's take GNU > > Aspell as an example; [...] Should the Aspell team offer bindings for > every > > known language? In your post, you recommend supporting a minimum of > > three. Which three? Why? > > No. Aspell should offer bindings for THE "Unity API" and the > respective "abstraction communities" are then responsible for > maintaining a plugin for their "abstraction" into THE Unity API. > Adding a new API is seldom the way to decrease the number of API's. At least, not without -=very=- centralized control over which API's get used. I actually rather like it that no language has achieved the dominance today that C once enjoyed, rightly or wrongly.
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
