Re: [PATCH] Make "git reset" a builtin. (incomplete)

> Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > David Kastrup, Wed, Aug 22, 2007 19:17:16 +0200:
> >> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
> >> > And not making the scripts builtins helps Windows users how,
> >> > exactly?
> >> 
> >> Red herring.  The proposal was not to do nothing, but rather give git
> >> a dedicated scripting language internal to it.  Two suggestions of
> >> mine with different advantages were git-busybox and Lua.
> >
> > Different "disadvantages". How do you do pipes and safe
> > inter-program argument passing in Lua? Portably?
> 
> Argument quoting would have to depend on the system.  If you implement
> that, you should be able to use os.popen and os.system.  However, the
> general Lua approach would be to write wrappers around C routines
> dealing with the basic git data structures, giving you things like an
> iterator over the index and similar.  One would usually not call
> executables, but rather functions from a git-specific library.
> 
> Instead of stringing this stuff together with pipes, one would string
> it together using coroutines (Lua "threads" are strictly synchronous,
> about as fast as normal function calls, and a yield/resume rendezvous
> passes a value together with control).
> 
> So pipes would not be a natural building block, anyway.

> > What do you propose to do about gitbox becoming a dependency for
> > others, who inevitably start using it (why not? It promised to be
> > portable enough for Git itself!)
> 
> I don't understand what you mean here.
>