Future of cons?

[Nadim Khemir]

Hi all, I am relly glad this thread got so far and I hope we soon start
talking about what is to be done.

Before I get to the serious stuff I'd like to comment a mail that pissed me
off.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Doug Alcorn [mailto:address@hidden
> Rajesh Vaidheeswarran <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > Having said this (and before my net connectivity dies)... I would like
> > address the more specific issues at hand once I return to the US on the
> > 22nd of June.
> 
> Sounds good to me.  There's no hurry to do anything that I know of.

As much as I have respect for Rajesh private life and travels, I find it
very frustrating to read that "there is no hurry". Is this some kind of bad
joke or don't give a **** for what the users write. I have been complaining
for months so the web page is updated, so no new comer get in the same mess
as I did. This week I saw a "can't compile hello_world.c" mail. Wake up
Doug, the web site is a mess, it waists new comers and old users time
because YOU think it's OK to wait another month and another month to take
away a broken version. If the web page IS the place where things are to be
found than it HAS to be right. Find someone else to run the web site or find
a better system.

The serious stuff:

**************************

Get the web page to work, we need that for future development.

**************************

If you'll never change your build process, Cons is fine:
 One more time the thread's name says it all "Future of cons". Could we
please stop writing on the fact that it works now and it will still do if we
don't change a thing. If you are concerned by the future of Cons expect
changes and extra work. 

This doesn't mean that backward compatibility is not an issue, nor that some
of us have to learn another language (I still want to write scripts in
perl).

**************************

Perl front end to Scons: Yes it _is_ possible (have a look at
Inline::Python). If we decide that it is the main stream, I can run some
tests. This would allow us to write scripts in perl and python both using a
python core.

**************************

Using SCons as the core: I think we must have a serious look at that. I mean
that some people should try to present what is good and not. What the
limitations. Is that what we want?

**************************

Core language: if the front end problem is fixed, what core language is to
be used? Perl, python, C, C++ other. 

IMHO (read I don't care what language you like most I expose MY opinion)

I think all those languages are fine for the core (there might be other
please let me know)

C: 
        Negative: too old, compiled (are we going to have make files in the
build? ;-)), windows users don't have a compiler installed by default.
Maintenance is not very easy.
        Positive: runs on almost any platform, 


C++: same as C but much better when it comes to design and maintenance.

Python:
        Negative: No real (full) acceptance among "hard core" programmers,
not installed by default on most systems
        Positive: Scripted, easy on the user, _most_ python developers write
quite clear code (but when it's bad, it's really bad and boring)

Perl:
        Negative: If not controlled, the code can become an intricate mess.
        Positive: Scripted, installed by default on most systems, high
acceptance level except for beginner users. Fun (try explain why you love
your dad!).

**************************

Linux: I read a mail that states that we should try to get the linux kernel
build through Xcons. Ok the idea is fun but it's no more than that. When
we've learn can walk we can try to run after the linux build system.

Nadim Khemir
Senior Software Engineer

E-mail :  address@hidden
Internet : www.cpen.com

C Technologies AB
Ideon Research Park
Scheelevägen 19c, SE-223 70 Lund
Sweden