From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26888 invoked by uid 1002); 13 Aug 2003 18:32:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 20225 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2003 18:32:50 -0000 Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 04:32:48 +1000 From: Adam Porich To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Message-Id: <20030814043248.6e6bbc9f.adam@burrabooks.com> In-Reply-To: <20030813195610.672d9b5a.spider@gentoo.org> References: <200308131844.24013.lanius@gentoo.org> <20030813195610.672d9b5a.spider@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.3claws (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Sender: adam@burrabooks.com X-Sender-Domain: burrabooks.com X-Spam-Status: Scanned X-Spam-Score: (-2.5) X-Spam-Tests: DATE_IN_PAST_06_12,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01,SUPERLONG_LINE X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.29 (www . roaringpenguin . com / mimedefang) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Menu - Bash vs. Python Rule files X-Archives-Salt: abef7503-2faf-42ca-a068-d883a13e8946 X-Archives-Hash: 7d77cc6191c711b288956e5a089ba468 On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 19:56:10 +0200 Spider wrote: > begin quote > On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 18:44:24 +0200 > Heinrich Wendel wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Svyatogor and me are working on a menu system (like debian ones) for > > gentoo. Now we have come to the part where we have to decide whether > > to use python or bash scripts for the rule files of the window > > managers. > > > > The Python scripts are 2 times as fast as a bash script and in my > > opinion would make live easier, are easier to handle. But svyatogor > > votes for bash scripts, as more people know how to write bash scripts > > than python scripts, here an example of both: > > > I wish to put my vote in for python. > > > //Spider > I like the idea of a scripting language higher than 'sh' being included in gentoo by default. And, considering we already require python for portage, it makes sense. A language that is richer than 'sh' can make our low level scripts read a lot nicer. Even if someone is not familiar with python, a complicated script can be much easier to read in python than in 'sh'. Our default scripts (e.g. menus, init scripts, modules and others) should be as simple as possible. If that is possible in bash ('sh?') then that makes sense but if the readability of these can be increased by a higher level language (particularly python as we already require it ... I think? ) then by all means go for it (in my opinion). Cheers, Adam Porich -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list