[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Debugging
Dude. Chill. Relax. Don't take things so personally. Nobody is calling
you a moron. I understood *exactly* what you're talking about. Hence my
use of the phrase "web site engine", rather than "web pages". You and I
just see things differently, I would rather leverage existing software
such as Apache, MySQL, and Perl (and the vast human resources) than
develop my own engine/database for storage and retrevial. I'm just not
that good.
On Tue, 7 Mar 2000, Jason Pincin wrote:
> You're missing my point totally Aaron. You basicly just wasted a whole
> bunch of hot air here in this email cuz yur preaching to the choir. I'm
> not saying we develop the web site in C. Jesus... do you think I'm a
> moron??? When I talk about C development, I'm talking about the NEXT
> project. ODS. And that will be an application on the level of something
> like MySQL or PostgreSQL... and those type of Apps you will not find
> written in Perl because the speed diff in that enviroment is significant.
>
> Now, before you waste any more time on this, try to comprehend what I'm
> really saying. Thanks.
>
> Jason
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 06, 2000 at 12:29:20AM -0800, Aaron Turner wrote:
> >
> > Jason,
> >
> > Who writes web apps in C anymore? EVERYONE is doing ASP, PHP, mod_perl,
> > Java Serverlets, or some other high-level language. The reason is that
> > these tools are making the execution speed difference gap smaller and
> > smaller, whiles making the time-to-market faster and faster. No, I
> > wouldn't write a disk-defragger in Perl. Nor, would I build a web site
> > engine like the LKB in C.
> >
> > I think you will quickly learn that the speed advantages you'll find in C
> > are not only less than you expect, but greatly outweighted by the
> > requirements placed on the coder. As long as I am a part of the LKB, I
> > will not support a port to C or C++. It just doesn't make any sense for
> > us to move in that direction while the rest of the world is moving in the
> > opposite.
> >
> > I feel that a C/C++ port would prevent us from ever gaining a reasonable
> > developer base, and that is one of my major concerns. Go back and read
> > the emails from the developer interest forms. Notice how few hours people
> > can spend on our project. If you can get people interested in working on
> > the project because it will help them in their professional carrers,
> > you'll find people are much more interested in helping. Right now people
> > who know mod_perl are in VERY HIGH demand and are commanding premium
> > salaries. Working on the LKB would be very interesting to them since it
> > allows them to show off and hone their skills. I'm sure the same could
> > be said of JavaServerlets coders as well. There aren't many web C++
> > positions from what I can tell.
> >
> > Anyways, we've hashed this enough I think. It's obvious we won't agree,
> > and that's ok. We'll worry about that when the time comes. We have more
> > pressing issues to deal with for now anyways.
> >
> > Anyways, my email/web/irc access for the next week will be limited at
> > best. I'll try to keep in touch as I work on the CmdSchedule script.
> >
> > -Aaron
> >
> > On Mon, 6 Mar 2000, Jason Pincin wrote:
> >
> > > > And franky, I'm not sure OO is this silver bullet you make it out to be.
> > > > OO programs are slower and OO adds additional complexity and overhead.
> > >
> > > Don't believe me. Look at the truely LARGE projects goin on... they all have an OO design. There's
> > > reasons for that. OO adds complexity? Hrm. Well if we hadn't implimented an object system, we'd be
> > > SOL right now when small things changed... object systems protect you... but nevermind that...
> > >
> > > > My point isn't that we should choose Perl over Python or C++, or OO vs
> > > > non-OO. My point is that you need to get developer buy-in on whatever
> > > > language we use. If you want to get out of coding and start looking at
> > > > more big picture things, then this should be very important to you. I
> > > > can't stress this enough. If you want to code forever, then do what you
> > > > will. If you want to get out of coding like you always tell me you do,
> > > > then let the developers decide what to do.
> > >
> > > I'm not looking at this from an LKB perspective when I say C++. When I re-write the code, it will NOT
> > > be for the LKB. It will be for a seperate project entirely... and it will be an application, not a
> > > service, and it will be C/C++. My hope is that when that project is usable, the LKB will migrate to
> > > it... and I don't see any reason why it wouldn't... for I never plan to shrink my involvment in it...
> > > so...
> > >
> > > Thats why the language isn't open for discussion. :) For an actualy application such as what I have
> > > in mind... a server/daemon... Perl/Python/PHP... nothing can touch the speed of C. And that's what'll
> > > matter too me then :)
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jason Pincin
> > > Linux Knowledge Base Project Leader (http://www.linuxkb.org/)
> > > http://vodka.linuxkb.org/~chardros/
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Aaron Turner, Core Developer http://vodka.linuxkb.org/~aturner/
> > Linux Knowledge Base Organization http://www.linuxkb.org/
> > Because world domination requires quality open documentation.
> > aka: aturner@vicinity.com, aturner@pobox.com, ion_beam_head@ashtech.net
> > The difference between `Unstable' and `Usable' is only two characters: NT
> >
>
> --
> Jason Pincin
> Linux Knowledge Base Project Leader (http://www.linuxkb.org/)
> http://vodka.linuxkb.org/~chardros/
>
--
Aaron Turner, Core Developer http://vodka.linuxkb.org/~aturner/
Linux Knowledge Base Organization http://www.linuxkb.org/
Because world domination requires quality open documentation.
aka: aturner@vicinity.com, aturner@pobox.com, ion_beam_head@ashtech.net
The difference between `Unstable' and `Usable' is only two characters: NT