On Wednesday 09 February 2011 15:07:07 Martin Vidner wrote: > Amaranth: Why Ruby > ================== > > Robert suggested a survey to choose the language, but that would > omit the reasoning, the criteria. The implied criterion is: > > - popularity among current and potential contributors > where Ruby wins the SUSE WebYaST people and other SUSE web/Rails > developers > > Let me add other ones I could think of: > > - existing code base > We have YaPI and User in Perl > We want to interface with WebYaST in Ruby > > - the above two combined: libraries and contributors of other distros' > yast-like tools Fedora, Ubuntu, Pardus use Python > > - runtime efficiency > it matters for installation RAM requirements > I don't have the data. Anyone? > So far I found http://eigenclass.org/R2/writings/object-size-ruby-ocaml > which basically says that rb 1.8 has bloated @members so use 1.9 or > structs. > > In the end I think that barring a veto by another criterion, the > most important one is the availability of developers to make the > transition. That results in Ruby, but I may be wrong and maybe there > are five of you who will say "Yes! As long as it's Intercal!" > > Please reply with insights into the criteria already mentioned, your > preferences, or other criteria.
Actually, we should use upstream stuff where appropriate, and here I see Python more common. As long as we want to use e.g. PackageKit as back-end, we need to have Python installed (and occupying memory) anyway. I think that we should look into libraries which will most likely be used and consider whether it is worth it aligning on a single language. Jiri -- Regards, Jiri Srain YaST Team Leader --------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX, s.r.o. e-mail: [email protected] Lihovarska 1060/12 tel: +420 284 084 659 190 00 Praha 9 fax: +420 284 084 001 Czech Republic http://www.suse.cz -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
