Dirkjan Ochtman d...@gentoo.org writes:
I guess by now pretty much everyone knows that the python eclass is
rather complex, and that this poses some problems. This has also been
an important cause for the disagreements between Arfrever and some of
the other developers. Since it appears that Arfrever won't be
committing much code to gentoo-x86 in the near future, I'm trying to
figure out where we should go with the python.eclass. This email is an
attempt at figuring that out, plus eliciting ideas to come up with a
general framework that will also solve this for ruby and other similar
runtimes (while supporting some of the features that the current
python eclass has, but that ruby-ng doesn't have).
So I know a bunch of people have already looked at it, and I'd like to
know: what do you find better about the Ruby approach compared to the
Python approach? Is it just the size of python.eclass, or are there a
number of other issues?
Let's skip the Ruby step, and go directly to Common Lisp!
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.
