Re: cons development

On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 06:06:58PM -0800, Bob Sidebotham wrote:
> I'm confident that SCons is a significant improvement of design and
> implementation over Cons, based on the rigor with which Stephen has
> approached his work with Cons in the past, and based on what I've seen
> of the SCons design documents, etc. I'm not so sure that the arguments
> for Python as the implementation language are so compelling (to tell
> the truth, I haven't really *seen* any arguments on this).
> 
> Rather than maintaining two separate, diverging software construction
> systems, I think it would be interesting to consider translating SCons
> from Python into Perl. The reference implementation would be maintained
> in Python (or perhaps a superset of Python (or annotated Python) that
> would allow easy translation into Perl or Python code).
[snip]

Sure. I'm all for it. But first, we should be sure that this will actually
be more beneficial than just writing a Perl frontend to SCons.


T

-- 
Lawyer: (n.) An innocence-vending machine, the effectiveness of which depends
on how much money is inserted.


_______________________________________________
[email protected]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/cons-discuss
Cons URL: http://www.dsmit.com/cons/