SoC

[Duane Whitty]

On Tuesday, 15 May 2007 at  1:05:07 -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> Tom Evans wrote:
> >On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 22:17 -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> >>Ruby's nice, but it's built on Perl so I have suspicions on its overall 
> >>usability / speed given my experience with Perl over the past 4 months 
> >>daily for work :(.. Ruby's just the new big thing for programming 
> >>languages, so everyone's into it. Kind of like how Java was compared to 
> >>C/C++ a few years back. But once everything dies down people will 
> >>realize that they'll still have to program in C/C++/Perl for real-world 
> >>applications.
> >>
> >>Python seems better than Ruby from what I can see, but I really don't 
> >>like the mandatory indentation thing. Ew..
> >>
> >
> >Rubies are better Perls. That's the only connection between the two. One
> >day, a Japanese programmer got fed up with Perl, and wrote a better
> >language (for varying meanings of better).
> >
> >Its not based or built on Perl in any respect.
> >
> >Python and Ruby both have the same targets; to speed development time
> >and increase programmer productivity.
> 
> But one must make a Perl before one can make a Ruby. Maybe that was what 
> I was trying to aim for.
> 
> Ruby's nice, but it seems like it's going to be a bit passe in a few 
> years like Java was for compilable / interpretable languages.
> 
> -Garrett
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-hackers at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"

None of this matters


My only point is that if you need something quick to explore the format of
pkgdb.db or INDEX.db you are pretty well assured of finding a tool you
can work with; Perl, Python, or Ruby.  If these aren't sufficient use C.

The pkg_* tools are written in C so in C they will be modified; but no
harm in doing initial exploration and prototyping with something else.

Let's stay focused!

Duane