Re: Preferred language?

Hmmm... You mean in the standard distribution installation or in the distro
at all, as what I wanted to write us meant for developers and thus should
bot be included in the default install.
However, I'm thinking I should write them in Python so that users don't
have to install more than interpreter.
BTW, if you want to have lua for scripting I cam write the scripts in
moonscript :P, if we were to include in the standard distribution only lua
,that would be awesome.
El 30/3/2015 9:07, "Joel Roth" <[email protected]> escribió:

> On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 08:46:50PM -0300, Hisham wrote:
> > On 27 March 2015 at 09:39, Sergio Tortosa Benedito <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > Well I'm writing this e-mail because I want to know which languages do
> you
> > > know/prefer since I might write some tools.
> > >
> > > *Python: pretty much industry standard
> > > *Ruby: meant to be fun, higher DSL capabilites
> > > *Lua: fast,small and also DSL capable (with some trickery)
> > > And now some other which are not so known but interesting:
> > > *Nim: Python + Pascal with the highest grade of metaprogamming I have
> ever
> > > seen
> > > *Crystal: Attempts to be compiled ruby.
> > > The interesting thing about crystal is it's typing  system which is a
> mix
> > > between dynamic and static, it's dynamic because var=1; var="hello"
> > > works,it's static because the variable's types are known at compile
> time.
> > >
> > > As anyone may infer, one feature I find interesting it's
> metaprogramming so
> > > we can write a small DSL (Domain Specific Language) and simplify code.
> > >
> > > Now my opinion: From the list the one less suited for the job it's Lua
> (it
> > > lacks some syntax sugar,also lacks standard libraries with support for
> some
> > > basic operations, and even though they exist, they are external).
> Python's
> > > limitations in metaprogramming may make a disadvantage.
> >
> > If my memory serves me right Ruby is not even included in our default
> install.
> >
> > We have tools written in Python, Bash and a little C.
> >
> > I do not recommend writing any new tools in Bash. If anything, we'd
> > prefer to port the existing tools away from Bash, even.
>
> > Aitor Iturri once started an effort in this direction for porting into
> Lua:
> > http://github.com/gobolinux/Lua-GoboLinux
> > But this codebase is outdated. Aitor recently mentioned he was
> > thinking about updating this code, but updating+completing the port is
> > a lot of work.
>
> Lua would be a great improvement over bash!
>
> > Lua would be easy to include in the base install because it's so small
> > and light on dependencies. You'll need extra modules in order to do
> > useful stuff with it, though.
>
> Easy now, at least as I parse your Fosdem talk on Luarocks :-)
>
> > So, in practical terms for potential inclusion in core GoboLinux, even
> > though it's not my favorite language, Python would be your best bet.
>
> Widely used, and batteries included.
>
> Joel
>
> > -- Hisham
> > _______________________________________________
> > gobolinux-users mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://lists.gobolinux.org/mailman/listinfo/gobolinux-users
>
> --
> Joel Roth
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gobolinux-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.gobolinux.org/mailman/listinfo/gobolinux-users
>

_______________________________________________
gobolinux-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gobolinux.org/mailman/listinfo/gobolinux-users