Re: official support for more scripting languages in gnome needed

[Ben Ford <ben kalifornia com>]

Nathan Hurst wrote:

> On Sun, 18 Mar 2001, Ben Ford wrote:
>
> > MS BASIC --> QBASIC --> Visual Basic -- >VBS --> "I Love You"
> >
> > And the viruses spread because it is very difficult to actually disable VB
> > scripting.  (kinda like requiring perl . . .  )
>
> As James pointed out, python includes a reduced environment that ensures
> that bad code cannot do anything more than chew cpu time(and that is
> controllable through other utils.).
>
> If you are worried about security, and memory and cpu performance then I
> will argue that python(and to a lesser extent, Perl) provide a better
> system than C:
>
> Firstly, security - python is more secure than C because it doesn't allow
> buffer overruns due to its handling of strings as a first class type.  It
> is also less likely to be susceptible to side channel attacks because it
> doesn't interpret strings as side effects.  python programs are shorter
> and are thus easier to analyse and test.
>

And embedded macros are not written in C.

>
> Secondly, memory - it has been brought up before, and is worth
> re-iterating.  interpreted languages often use less memory because of the
> higher level constructs available, and because more code is shared between
> processes.

But you have to load an interpreter.  In some cases a copy of the interpreter
*per* script.

>
>
> Thirdly, cpu time - programs such as gftp spent 99% or more time waiting
> for input.  the data is then handled by the underlying unix operating
> system and all the python program does is manage the relationships between
> data streams.
>
> Finally, development time is reduced because rather than wade through
> large amounts of code, the developer can concentrate on the logic of the
> program they are designing.  If any subportion turns out to be slow, then
> that bit can be re-written in C for speed.  If this isn't enough, the
> developer has an idea of what the C implementation should actually do and
> can make a better implementation than if they had to make their prototype
> in C.
>
> njh

Fine.  I have no problem with scripting languages being used in a RAD
environment.

****BUT DON'T FORCE THEM ON ME WHEN I DON'T WANT THEM****

I don't think you guys are convinced as to why I don't want to run these, but
the fact of the matter is - I want the choice.  I want to choose *what* I do
and do not run on my machine.  If you take this choice away from me, I *will*
go somewhere else.  That is all I have to say.

(I should set up and autoresponder that says - "I just want the choice of what
I run on MY box.".  Maybe after enough of those somebody will get it that I
don't give a shit if you write gftp in python or not, and I care less if
GnuCash uses guile.  I just want to be able to say *NO FUCKING PERL, OK?!?!*)