From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4266 invoked by alias); 14 Feb 2007 18:01:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 4247 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Feb 2007 18:01:00 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nile.gnat.com (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 18:00:53 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3846D48CDB5; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 13:00:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from nile.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (nile.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 03511-01-3; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 13:00:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (nile.gnat.com [205.232.38.5]) by nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E79E448CC5F; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 13:00:11 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <45D34E2E.7070701@adacore.com> Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 18:29:00 -0000 From: Robert Dewar User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Windows/20061207) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii CC: jimb@codesourcery.com, gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: GDB and scripting languages - which References: <20070108222005.GA27451@nevyn.them.org> <20070210203307.GA27502@nevyn.them.org> <45D33263.2080403@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-02/txt/msg00134.txt.bz2 Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:01:39 -0500 >> From: Robert Dewar >> CC: Jim Blandy , gdb@sourceware.org >> >> that's really pure FUD > > Thanks, this kind of attitude really helps to facilitate free > expression of opinions on this list. Well my use of the term FUD here was considered. You were arguing that Python would introduce excessive overhead, but with absolutely no supporting data, or detailed argument. To me a claim like that is definitely in the general fear-uncertainty-doubt category, and is not very helpful ... simple opinions are not very useful unless they are grounded in some clear facts. My experience with Python (mostly in the context of its use as a scripting language for GPS), is that it is powerful, easy to use, and does not introduce excessive overhead. The organization of Python is modalar, lots of the capability is in libraries which you only get if you access, and having a python interpretor installed seems like a more and more reasonable thing, given the increasing popularity of this language for many things.