Re: official support for more scripting languages in gnome needed

[James Henstridge <james daa com au>]

On Mon, 19 Mar 2001, Naba Kumar wrote:

>
> Ben Ford wrote:
>
> > > > What I propose is to make
> > > > popular scripting languages like Python and Perl (I
> > > > have nothing against lisp
> > > > dialects, but there are much more programmers who
> > > > know Python or Perl than who
> > > > know lisp) a requirement of gnome (so e.g. gnome
> > > > won't run without them), and
> > > > so that bindings for these languages are shipped
> > > > with gnome, and it would be
> > > > highly appreciated from utility authors to write
> > > > their utils not in C, but in
> > > > either Perl or Python. This will result in
> > > > availability of a ton of
> > > > feature-rich, polished and intelligent and helpful
> > > > utilities available with
> > > > gnome.
> >
> > And it will also result in at least one fewer Gnome user.  Me.
> >
>
> And me. :-).

Why should you care what language a useful tool is written in?  For many
tasks, there is no noticable speed or CPU usage problems when choosing a
scripting language.  Often these languages let the programmer write
shorter programs that are less likely to have bugs in them.  Why is this a
bad thing?

Do you refuse to play AisleRiot because the game rules are written in
scheme?

I am not sure I am in favour of rewriting existing applications in python
or perl just for the sake of using a scripting language though.

James.