Re: Revisiting the Gnome Bindings

[Sri Ramkrishna <sri aracnet com>]

On Sat, 2004-09-25 at 19:28 -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:

> Personally I'd support adding pygtk *only* - because it's a very clearly
> different kind of language than C, appropriate in different cases. So it
> would still be useful even if we added a new "system programming"
> language like C++/C#/Java someday.

GNOME needs an official scripting language as well (ala visual basic)
and Python works very well.  While I'm partial to perl, I've learned to
appreciate Python simply because writing gui is so damn simple and
perl's OO code looks awful and hard to understand (IMHO).  Python would
make an excellent complimentary language.

> 
> But see how quickly followups to my mail become a language flamewar
> about how we should really add perl, or C++, or whatever ;-) I think
> that's the core thing that might end up blocking a dependency on
> bindings :-/

I'd let the languages fight based on their technical merits.  It'll be
obvious in a year or two which language people are gravitating to;
making the choice a lot easier.  Lets not force a decision but allow
natural selection to make the choice for us.

sri
-- 
Sri Ramkrishna <sri<removethis>@aracnet.com>