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

From: Reece Dunn <msclrhd@googlemail.com>
Date: Aug 22, 2007, 21:34 UTC
Message-ID: <3f4fd2640708221434i4f5650e0u9adb523742666f40@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <86mywjcwv7.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz>

On 22/08/07, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:

Show 19 quoted lines

> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
>
> > On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, David Kastrup wrote:
> >> > If the scripting engine of choice for cobbling together
> >> > prototypes remains the Unix toolchain outside of git proper, then
> >> > Windows users will _always_ remain second class citizens since
> >> > they will get to work with and on new porcelain much later than
> >> > the rest of the world: namely when somebody bothers porting his
> >> > new favorite tool for them to C.
> >>
> >> Right.
> >
> > 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.

That is a really neat idea.

> Two suggestions of
> mine with different advantages were git-busybox and Lua.  A third one
> was once proposed by Linus with some code example: starting a
> scripting language from scratch.

Do you have a link to the proposal?

> So obviously, the need for something
> like that is recognized, and not having to start from zero for that
> might be an advantage if a good, workable language can be found.

It would also aid the Windows porting effort by having a single, builtin scripting engine that does not have differing behaviours on different platforms.

One thing that will need sorting is the binding of the C plumbing/builtin command API to the scripting language, but this shouldn't be that difficult to do.

- Reece