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 22BA9138350 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 12:35:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A5C9FE0A44; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 12:35:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-40141.protonmail.ch (mail-40141.protonmail.ch [185.70.40.141]) (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 3663FE0974 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 12:35:51 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 12:35:38 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail; t=1587731749; bh=cdMLkz6gXBkiPiQcv3NwGL23cxxfhEonmoW7mR9fbFY=; h=Date:To:From:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=Uy1sXmDemA7Qjpx2sq7nr1589+bBPu6qqEzR+nNOF45Ub3LEILNsH7J5YFRczaY5t 0EFHdCluR+CHzvwR1o7mZsjqkcF4Y1iykbRTkof2aL+C/Vu3aTIigzqm/LM8bDYc72 5loc6h681kxCo3byFIRARq9RIKPhXlx/Ugc0MUYg= To: "gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org" From: Caveman Al Toraboran Subject: Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead? Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: <20200421165803.GB187193@redacted> <11506562.O9o76ZdvQC@peak> <20200421190145.GF187193@redacted> <20200422161455.GA23147@legohost> <8d6cf054-f358-1a2c-0a16-71961a6f3291@gentoo.org> <20200422163137.GB4639@legohost> 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=7.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM shortcircuit=no autolearn=disabled version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on mail.protonmail.ch X-Archives-Salt: 9171aedb-2266-4f6f-b877-3badc08fee81 X-Archives-Hash: 2125eb033175c20afab3d44bfdc2dd36 On Wednesday, April 22, 2020 8:32 PM, Michael Jones wr= ote: > > =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 wr= itten 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 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 co= mpliant package manager. probably same kind of people that are headed to blow their legs (and ours) in the process.