From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 88547138350 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 17:56:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2DA08E0BF1; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 17:56:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-lj1-x232.google.com (mail-lj1-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCD92E0ADC for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 17:56:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lj1-x232.google.com with SMTP id u6so10849565ljl.6 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 10:56:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=bS5vGYcDEQw3MINFRhsXcMvtA4eceRY9AyfhDxJXXCw=; b=rgIWeEjy1qY9i5bCZrU8KQ1RwWFP3p4tvsQvRxO7IQKpK/Wm7//zsl6//+NZ1po4GY tX5QcodyWhv7junG7CQ7F/bwSdHYdS9K9E2CYsDopcDamGW4w1t2RjtlnPOPR0PSddM/ cjlWF1bl+SzswCjXqFbJkikoqtF8j1KVNNLFX9RbSqffsUXbUVpWo4is8bzhMAog/Vaf KpykAVJAcGu2BeZIiz3ZDJCWdZ8A4ZMU7Lafgk7hLf5RoVtoch7ilYQd//GEyEDCiUsh 2lfz52+xBSUtJ6vDY37ZxE26FlW4n7XeTcAPaD/DB74X10hslvxNY3rm+qnaYh20cRkr GrUA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=bS5vGYcDEQw3MINFRhsXcMvtA4eceRY9AyfhDxJXXCw=; b=fWblLyEZ+CRgEa9va2WCkgvuBEvs1GMYIytjMSAoPoHviRxzPl6FuXhaNp/E46wV+C pDWKmcIwGv3Puif/m2EESr8asl4P0CR6LD2BD7YVE5djqI/2HB/BJerqHYKxbp0flmG1 /Sz2eGwX0Jaw8S+tklJTb+JDe/wqoclJcqoRQzZf3JEQrCcQGPRlozAA5Nsm0HZ2h4Yg eIkzhHzsJRwZutX93spD/j8OZ3YTizOU5rH5Fc0UB4rzazYyuoPmO0PwDGgnmnrvkViD R/vNi4myjjV/C0DnMx1fq5jkNcsTP04x85bWcElDMyNgaU5hR+YcOv2XEiVjd50b/xFI 9zGA== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuYwIExY8Why7ROtWTgUtVssF+1bStSHFiup36I0r/+O9M1qRyNZ dIO+Df+q2Z5HfMxsHcn57Z+/oUsuX+/ZRc3Ci/O6Ew== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypITVb1hl/hUPU3y06m6jwjOISrl9T9HafEx4lO3Vtj5UO7n0mmgiEccpkxp2aHJ+kbFx0L5AAwke8pGrfPjgQo= X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:549:: with SMTP id q9mr2395983ljp.236.1587750991186; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 10:56:31 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200421165803.GB187193@redacted> <11506562.O9o76ZdvQC@peak> <20200421190145.GF187193@redacted> <20200422161455.GA23147@legohost> <8d6cf054-f358-1a2c-0a16-71961a6f3291@gentoo.org> <20200422163137.GB4639@legohost> In-Reply-To: From: Michele Alzetta Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 19:56:18 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead? To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d25f7c05a40d155a" X-Archives-Salt: 231f6058-f68b-4b34-bb3c-a776f4901c8d X-Archives-Hash: 6c7a644d2e50a1fa8fd97a2a5aef062c --000000000000d25f7c05a40d155a Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" I mean, basically portage is just a set of functions, so a functional programming language might just be the best way to go Il giorno ven 24 apr 2020 alle ore 19:54 Michele Alzetta < michele.alzetta@gmail.com> ha scritto: > ... seems like you're describing haskell ... > ... now, portage written in haskell would be really something > > Il giorno ven 24 apr 2020 alle ore 14:36 Caveman Al Toraboran < > toraboracaveman@protonmail.com> ha scritto: > >> On Wednesday, April 22, 2020 8:32 PM, Michael Jones >> wrote: >> >> > > No-no. C++ is a nightmare. A few people want to use it. >> > >> > C++ is an extremely widespread language with millions of lines of code >> written daily world wide. >> >> i think that might be misleading as it seems to >> imply that being a c++ dev is mutually exclusive >> against being a c dev (is it? the languages agree on >> many syntaxes/features). >> >> i think the right way of thinking is as follows: >> >> 1. identify programming features needed to code >> a reliable pms. i think most likely all we >> need is [recursive] function calls and >> if/else/loops. the rest probably has to do >> with algorithms (independent of the language). >> >> 2. pick language that has features (1) and has the >> largest users base. if the set of features in >> (1) is small enough (such as ones i suggested), >> then the c++ developers should be counted as c >> developers (because that part is common between >> c++ and c). >> >> 3. apply occam's razor. if two languages are >> equally satisfying points (1) and (2), then >> choose the simplest one. but if my thought is >> correct (that we only need the subset of >> features in c++ that's already in c), then c is >> guaranteed to have a greater effective number >> of developers in step (2). hence, we will not >> even need to apply occam's razor to remove c++ >> (unless points (1) and (2) result in a tie, >> which i don't think it does in this case). >> >> > Lots of people want to use it. Just not people who want to write a PMS >> compliant package manager. >> >> probably same kind of people that are headed to >> blow their legs (and ours) in the process. >> >> >> --000000000000d25f7c05a40d155a Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I mean, basically portage is just a set of functions, so a= functional programming language might just be the best way to go

=
Il giorno = ven 24 apr 2020 alle ore 19:54 Michele Alzetta <michele.alzetta@gmail.com> ha scritto:
... see= ms like you're describing haskell ...
... now, portage written in h= askell would be really something

=
Il giorno ven 24 apr 2020 alle ore 14= :36 Caveman Al Toraboran <toraboracaveman@protonmail.com> ha scritto:
On Wednesday, Apri= l 22, 2020 8:32 PM, Michael Jones <gentoo@jonesmz.com> wrote:

> > =C2=A0 No-no. C++ is a nightmare. A few people want to use it. >
> C++ is an extremely widespread language with millions of lines of code= written daily world wide.=C2=A0

i think that might be misleading as it seems to
imply that being a c++ dev is mutually exclusive
against being a c dev (is it? the languages agree on
many syntaxes/features).

i think the right way of thinking is as follows:

1. identify programming features needed to code
=C2=A0 =C2=A0a reliable pms.=C2=A0 i think most likely all we
=C2=A0 =C2=A0need is [recursive] function calls and
=C2=A0 =C2=A0if/else/loops.=C2=A0 the rest probably has to do
=C2=A0 =C2=A0with algorithms (independent of the language).

2. pick language that has features (1) and has the
=C2=A0 =C2=A0largest users base.=C2=A0 if the set of features in
=C2=A0 =C2=A0(1) is small enough (such as ones i suggested),
=C2=A0 =C2=A0then the c++ developers should be counted as c
=C2=A0 =C2=A0developers (because that part is common between
=C2=A0 =C2=A0c++ and c).

3. apply occam's razor.=C2=A0 if two languages are
=C2=A0 =C2=A0equally satisfying points (1) and (2), then
=C2=A0 =C2=A0choose the simplest one.=C2=A0 but if my thought is
=C2=A0 =C2=A0correct (that we only need the subset of
=C2=A0 =C2=A0features in c++ that's already in c), then c is
=C2=A0 =C2=A0guaranteed to have a greater effective number
=C2=A0 =C2=A0of developers in step (2).=C2=A0 hence, we will not
=C2=A0 =C2=A0even need to apply occam's razor to remove c++
=C2=A0 =C2=A0(unless points (1) and (2) result in a tie,
=C2=A0 =C2=A0which i don't think it does in this case).

> Lots of people want to use it. Just not people who want to write a PMS= compliant package manager.

probably same kind of people that are headed to
blow their legs (and ours) in the process.


--000000000000d25f7c05a40d155a--