On Sunday 01 October 2006 13:11, Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> On Sunday 01 October 2006 12:57, Guillaume Laurent wrote:
> > Yes, but for non-basic apps which can be written in a scripting language,
> > it's better if they are all written in the same one, so we can limit both
> > memory usage and dependencies to a single binding.
>
> In an ideal world, yes, perhaps. But we don't have that luxury: I much
> prefer having the necessary applications written at all to not having them
> written because the person who has time & inclination to do something
> cannot stomach JavaScript.

We have different experiences I guess. As far as I'm concerned, I've lost 
count on the "cool" apps which I would have loved to use but were written 
using some exotic language/bindings and which therefore were carrying so many 
dependencies that installing them was simply not worth it.

I've also never met a programmer worth its salt which wouldn't write a useful 
app just because he wouldn't like a given language.

Did enforcing C++ as a single programming language hindered KDE ? No. Did 
trying to have dozens of languages helped Gnome ? No. So why would it be 
different if we choose a standard scripting language ?

-- 
Guillaume.
http://www.telegraph-road.org