Mike Meyer wrote:
There is no intention to dictate, but instead to provide out-of-the-box, built-into-the-architecture support for a single language or a wide array of languages. For now, this will begin with a single language and the question is merely which one. Python has been chosen, but some would argue that others are a better choice, such as Lisp. In the future, or whenever someone steps up to the plate, support for the CLR will be implemented, thus broadening the array of integrally supported programming languages (i.e IronPython, Boo, and so forth).Arich Chanachai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
These last two points kind of diverge from the point, no? What I mean
is that we want to present the argument of why Python is the best
choice as THE built-in programming language for the revolutionary uuu
operating system.
A new operating system shouldn't be picking "THE" built-in programming language. It should instead be providing mechanisms to allow arbitrary programming languages to be used wherever they are required. Tying the users of the OS - or of some application - down to a specific language is a disservice to the developers and users of that OS or application.
While Python is an excellent language, and has a nice implementation for embedding/extending applications, it's not necessarily the best choice for all problems. You're be doing much better for your users to allow them to choose the right language for the problem than to dictate the language that has to be used.
<mike
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
