Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 04:55:29 +0000 From: Saifi Khan <saifi.khan@twincling.org> To: freebsd-questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Embedded scripting language advice sought Message-ID: <9a52b1190901242055r731a6622xb849bcd0b0b48782@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <237c27100901241934y64525bcey93103ae207c7c88f@mail.gmail.com> References: <237c27100901181541n412f66c3v24ebae43b9efc313@mail.gmail.com> <18804.55465.773953.874060@almost.alerce.com> <237c27100901241934y64525bcey93103ae207c7c88f@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 3:34 AM, Linda Messerschmidt <linda.messerschmidt@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 2:46 PM, George Hartzell <hartzell@alerce.com> wrote: >> I don't have any useful advice to offer, but I would love it if you >> would summarize anything interesting that you get. >> >> I do a lot of computational biology work and am always interested in >> extension language for my computing systems. > > There was not a lot of response. One suggestion for Tcl and one for Ruby. > > I figured that all of the possibilities were going to be a pain to > develop in their own unique way, so that was probably not the best > evaluation criteria. The best choice was going to be the one that the > people who were going to use it every day were the most comfortable > with. > > So what I did was code up little samples in each of the serious > contenders: Lua, Python, Ruby, and Tcl. Without telling people which > language was which, I sent them around for votes. I really liked the > Tcl syntax and I thought it was going to do really well, but Python > came back the winner. > > Even so, I kept researching for farther-flung alternatives and turned > up a couple of others as well, although several of the "embedded > languages" are pretty stale, dead, or haven't gotten past > 0.0.1-pre-alpha. Of the "haven't heard of it before" languages, only > one called Pike earned serious consideration. (Technically I had > heard of its predecessor LPC, but only as a result of a misspent > youth. :-) ) > > Pike and Python went head to head and, probably since our team is > heavy with C++ programmers, Pike came out on top. > > So, we've started doing a proof-of-concept using Pike and we'll see > how it goes. So far so good, and it's actually a pretty fun language > to work with. > > -LM Are you saying the choice is made on the basis of 'likeability' and not 'technical merit' ? -- thanks Saifi.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9a52b1190901242055r731a6622xb849bcd0b0b48782>