From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make "git reset" a builtin. (incomplete) Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 10:55:03 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: References: <46CC3090.7080500@gmail.com> <86absjenc3.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <46CC3C17.8040901@op5.se> <864pirej6w.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Nicolas Pitre X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Aug 23 11:55:40 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IO9PY-0005iK-S6 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 23 Aug 2007 11:55:33 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758474AbXHWJz1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Aug 2007 05:55:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758437AbXHWJz1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Aug 2007 05:55:27 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:34699 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1757011AbXHWJz0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Aug 2007 05:55:26 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 23 Aug 2007 09:55:25 -0000 Received: from wbgn128.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de (EHLO [192.168.0.57]) [132.187.25.128] by mail.gmx.net (mp058) with SMTP; 23 Aug 2007 11:55:25 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/RuWxskATRveMeo5qAEXiGyE9xI1SfYa2oAJGgiI v9MNQ1iBTw4VEd X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > What is wrong with going from shell to C? C _is_ portable. Instead > > of relying on _yet_ another scripting language, introducing _yet_ > > another language that people have to learn to hack git, introducing > > _yet_ another place for bugs to hide, why not just admit that shell is > > nice for _prototyping_? > > This is a narrow view of the programming world that I don't share. Well, you have to admit that some things are really, really hard to do in shell. Just from the top of my head: locking, data structures, portability, scalability, process control. There are a lot more, I guess, but for the _core_ of Git I really prefer C. > C is portable indeed, which is one of its upsides. But it has many > downsides too for many _users_, that as a Git _developer_ you apparently > conveniently ignore. I do not want to shove C down the throat of every Git user. You can use _whatever_ scripting language you like. Nevertheless, this is _different_ from the choice for _core_ Git. Eventually I'd like to be able to run Git on embedded systems, or my digital watch. > > Why do we have to to have the same discussion over and over and over > > again? > > Because, as shown by the recurring nature of this discussion, using C for > everything is evidently not the optimal solution. I think the reason is different (as shown by the content of the discussion). Ciao, Dscho