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

From: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
Date: Aug 22, 2007, 23:39 UTC
Message-ID: <85wsvnjg0v.fsf@lola.goethe.zz>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.0.999.0708221607590.30176@woody.linux-foundation.org>

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> writes:

Show 11 quoted lines

> On Thu, 23 Aug 2007, David Kastrup wrote:
>> >
>> > But your statement is provably wrong. Just *look* at well-maintained
>> > projects that have extended way past their original design and usage
>> > model. A lot of them are in C.
>> 
>> You mean like Emacs which is mostly scripted in Elisp?  Or the Gimp
>> which is mainly scripted using script-fu?
>
> No. I mean standard C code projects. Like the kernel. Like a huge
> class of other projects that are C. Not scripts.

By golly, you are right. Pretty much all projects that are defined by not including a script language don't include a script language.

> Big, huge, projects are all done in C, and they are well-maintained.

Ok, so Emacs is a small project. And Plone is a small project. And Ajax is a small project. And LaTeX is a small project. And autoconf is a small project. And gcc is a small project (we can't have RTL in a big, huge, project, after all). And the Linux kernel doesn't include Makefiles or any other stuff that would be scripted in anything but C.

> Scripting is not the rule at all. And it is silly to say that
> regular all-C projects need to have scripting.

Actually, if they are defined as all-C, they _can't_ have scripting by definition.

I am not really interested in continuing this. I don't think that there is much I can do to make my point clearer than I did, so any further amount of "does not" -- "does too" will not make anybody including ourselves change his mind.

All the best,

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum