From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Markus Armbruster Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call minutes for November 29 Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 20:10:26 +0100 Message-ID: References: <8762i3nczx.fsf@trasno.mitica> <4ED50F7C.2040903@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: quintela@redhat.com, Developers qemu-devel , KVM devel mailing list To: Avi Kivity Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:9710 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755199Ab1K2TK3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Nov 2011 14:10:29 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4ED50F7C.2040903@redhat.com> (Avi Kivity's message of "Tue, 29 Nov 2011 18:59:40 +0200") Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Avi Kivity writes: > On 11/29/2011 05:51 PM, Juan Quintela wrote: >> How to do high level stuff? >> - python? >> > > One of the disadvantages of the various scripting languages is the lack > of static type checking, which makes it harder to do full sweeps of the > source for API changes, relying on the compiler to catch type (or other) > errors. > > On the other hand, the statically typed languages usually have more > boilerplate. Since one of the goals is to simplify things, this > indicates the need for a language with type inference. > > On the third hand, languages with type inferences are still immature > (golang?), so we probably need to keep this discussion going until an > obvious choice presents itself. I wouldn't call ML immature. But I wouldn't call it a scripting language, either.