git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: newbie questions about git design and features (some wrt hg)
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 08:22:35 -0800 (PST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0701310805500.3632@woody.linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7vodofx06s.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>



On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> writes:
> > 
> > But I'll admit - my main reason going with C is (a) it's what I know and 
> > (b) I absolutely _hate_ being constrained by the language. The great thing 
> > about C (still) is that you can do *anything* in it. You're literally 
> > limited by hardware, and by your own abilities. Nothing else.
> 
> Well, if you count "time" as part of your own ability then that
> is true.  Some things are too cumbersome and not performance
> critical enough to do in C.

Sure. I'd probably not do some graphical front-end in C - although some of 
the toolkits make that resonable too. 

But even for "time", C actually does have a number of big advantages that 
some people often seem to overlook:

 - it has absolutely tons of infrastructure. Something like Perl comes 
   *close*, but in the end, even the Perl CPAN stuff is just a drop in the 
   bucket for what somebody programming in C has. Other scripting 
   languages? Outside of their specific things (ie the tcl/tk kind of 
   thing), they really have nothing.

 - perhaps even more importantly: there's a ton of clueful people who know 
   it. Maybe this stems from my personal blinders on what "competent" is 
   (and from just my sheltered life in general), but absolutely everybody 
   who is deeply competent will know C. Not everybody will want to program 
   in it, but they *all* know enough to be able to work with it.

The latter one is rather relevant for open source programming. Finding 
some really competent person who has written a library to do (say, purely 
hypothetically - NOT!) a clean and efficient "diff" implementation can be 
a huge deal. And you will find that using C. 

So yeah, C is low-level. Yeah, you have to know how "pointers" work. And 
yeah, it takes effort especially to get started. But once you have gotten 
started, you realize that:

 - it may have been a lot more work to get over the hump, but once you 
   did, you can find people who can work with you and help you.

 - yeah, you didn't really want to work with people who didn't know how a 
   "pointer to a function returning a const pointer" really works.

I agree that C is a really hard language for "prototyping". And yes, I'll 
also agree that probably 95% of all programming is really about 
prototyping. Make something that works, and move on. In that environment, 
C is simply wrong.

But in a real core infrastructure environment, I'd say that almost 
anything *but* C (or "fairly similar" language) tends to be a mistake.

So I personally tend to always work on that infrastructure thing, which is 
why I love C. If it's not "core enough" that C is the proper language, I'm 
probably simply not interested.

And yeah, it will change. I realize that. My bet is that C will remain as 
the default "system language" for at least another decade. 

Of course, is an SCM "core enough"? Some parts definitely are. The actual 
low-level diff generation fairly obviously is. Is revision walking? 
Per-file operations? hg and git disagree about that decision.

		Linus

  reply	other threads:[~2007-01-31 16:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-01-30 16:20 newbie questions about git design and features (some wrt hg) Mike Coleman
2007-01-30 16:41 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-01-30 16:55 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-01-31  1:55   ` Theodore Tso
2007-01-31 10:56     ` Jakub Narebski
2007-01-31 20:01       ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-31 22:25       ` Matt Mackall
2007-01-31 23:58         ` Jakub Narebski
2007-02-01  0:34           ` Matt Mackall
2007-02-01  0:57             ` Jakub Narebski
2007-02-01  7:59               ` Simon 'corecode' Schubert
2007-02-01 10:09                 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-02-01 10:15                   ` Simon 'corecode' Schubert
2007-02-01 10:49                     ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-02-01 16:28                     ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-01 19:36                       ` Eric Wong
2007-02-01 21:13                         ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-02  9:55             ` Jakub Narebski
2007-02-02 13:51               ` Simon 'corecode' Schubert
2007-02-02 14:23                 ` Jakub Narebski
2007-02-02 15:02                   ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-02-02 15:38               ` Mark Wooding
2007-02-02 16:09                 ` Jakub Narebski
2007-02-02 16:42                   ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-02 16:59                     ` Jakub Narebski
2007-02-02 17:11                       ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-02 17:59                     ` Brendan Cully
2007-02-02 18:19                       ` Jakub Narebski
2007-02-02 19:28                         ` Brendan Cully
2007-02-02 18:27                       ` Giorgos Keramidas
2007-02-02 19:01                         ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-03 21:20                           ` Giorgos Keramidas
2007-02-03 21:37                             ` Matthias Kestenholz
2007-02-03 21:41                             ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-03 21:45                             ` Jakub Narebski
2007-02-02 18:32                       ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-02 19:26                         ` Brendan Cully
2007-02-02 19:42                           ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-02 19:55                             ` Brendan Cully
2007-02-02 20:15                               ` Jakub Narebski
2007-02-02 20:21                               ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-02 16:03               ` Matt Mackall
2007-02-02 17:18                 ` Jakub Narebski
2007-02-02 17:37                   ` Matt Mackall
2007-02-02 18:44                     ` Jakub Narebski
2007-02-02 19:56                       ` Jakub Narebski
2007-02-03 20:06                         ` Brendan Cully
2007-02-03 20:55                           ` Jakub Narebski
2007-02-03 21:00                             ` Jakub Narebski
2007-01-30 17:44 ` Jakub Narebski
2007-01-30 18:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-01-30 19:37   ` Linus Torvalds
2007-01-30 18:11 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-31  3:38   ` Mike Coleman
2007-01-31  4:35     ` Linus Torvalds
2007-01-31  4:57       ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-31 16:22         ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2007-01-31 16:41           ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-01-31  7:11       ` Mike Coleman
2007-01-31 15:03     ` Nicolas Pitre
2007-01-31 16:58       ` Mike Coleman

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.64.0701310805500.3632@woody.linux-foundation.org \
    --to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=junkio@cox.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).