Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Portage-NG implementation language(s)

[Jason Stubbs <jasonbstubbs@mailandnews.com>]

On Saturday 06 December 2003 02:09, Marius Mauch wrote:
> Seeing this "language war" on -dev I think I should say again that the
> component model should make us free from language restrictions. There is
> no sense in saying "we should use language XXX for portage-ng" as the
> goal should be that each component can be implemented in the best
> fitting language. So it should be possible to have the dependency
> resolver in prolog, the ebuild parser in perl, the frontend in python,
> the storage backend in C and so on. 

I believe this is already part of the requirements.

> Instead of arguing about the "best" 
> language for implementation we should discuss about the language for the
> _interface_ for the component interaction.
> Once we have decided on that we can start creating the global
> architecture that describes which components interact with each other,
> which components are mandatory or optional and so on.

I think the point is that even designing the global architecture should come 
before deciding on a language for the component interaction interface.

> Later in that 
> process we can specify the first function signatures and start
> implementing the individual components. Then and not earlier we have to
> choose the implementation language.

This is correct. The implementation language for a particular component will 
be chosen once the framework is decided and it is time to create said 
particular component within that framework.

Regards,
Jason Stubbs

--
gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list