If I may make a meta-post:
We're getting into choosing the programming language, before we have
the design, and as many have pointed out, that's backwards. That's
fine, the thread can go that way, I'm not trying to shut it down. But
my main goal in posting was to confirm that the ideas about 2.0 that
we had at the summit last October had solidified into a basic
consensus, which seems to be the case. Now, 1.5 is probably more
urgent... :-)
-Karl
Carsten Breuer <CarstenBreuerSvn@textwork.de> writes:
> Hi Eric, hi all,
>
>>>> So we're going to need a working copy rewrite. We knew that; in fact
>>> And this time (if you allow me my humble two cent) get it right and
>>> cut the development time down to 1/10th by using a more evolved
>>> language than C. Python comes to mind, but anything would do.
>>
>> I concur. It's 2007, which is way too late in the game for you guys
>> to be spending your time chasing memory-allocation bugs.
>
> Do we? Memory-allocation bugs are always a problem of discipline and
> bad coding style. IMHO a good programmer doesn't need something
> like a garbage collection. He knows what he have allocated.
> With C++ we can wrap memory allocations in classes that handle memory
> allocations correct. So perhaps it is time to switch over to C++.
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
>
>
> Carsten
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Jun 30 01:29:19 2007