| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Linus played with Monotone beforeLinus played with Monotone beforePosted Sep 16, 2007 4:31 UTC (Sun) by graydon (subscriber, #5009)In reply to: Linus played with Monotone before by nlucas Parent article: Quotes of the week
I tire of this discussion. It's such trash-talk. It doesn't even relate to our project. Our code is neither OO nor remotely messy or hard to maintain; it's in an idiosyncratic style, but I hardly think kernel developers should be throwing stones there. It's absolutely packed with staic and dynamic checking code, so you're unlikely to screw it up too badly if you make a mistake. I'm not going to leap to defend C++. It's just a language. It's got a few advantages over C -- exceptions, destructors, strings, vectors and maps in the standard library -- but honestly it's still covered in warts. Show me a mature language that isn't. Languages are all tradeoffs. I picked it at random from an uninspiring set of choices. Git is smaller and leaner because of a variety of hard-wired design decisions that we've intentionally rejected, just as they rejected our design decisions. Our history structure is richer -- including better merging -- we don't have as many trust failure modes, our disk, memory and network formats are decoupled, each is independently field-upgradable, and we compile and run on more toolchains and platforms than git. The rest of the discussion is just random flame rhetoric.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|
||||||||||||