[Kde-bindings] Lengthy discussion about bindings languages in KDE core modules

[Simon Edwards]

Richard Dale wrote:
> Yes, I agree. I see no need to write stuff like system settings, which is just 
> a bunch of forms that write to config files in c++ 'for efficiency'. 

> I was writing interpreted p-code apps in Pascal over 20 years ago, that ran on 
> two 64k Z80s and even then it made sense to use an interpreted language. If 
> we are still having arguments about compiled vs interpreted when typical 
> machines have 1 or 2 Gb or ram, we've screwed up somewhere.

There are a number of aspects in that conversation which found 
disturbing. Firstly, it appears that some people would prefer no 
software (e.g. mythical C++ apps which have not been written) over a 
non-C++ app which does exist. This is insane. I don't understand how a 
user not being able to complete a task at all is considered preferable 
to them using a non-C++ app.

Secondly, some people seem to place no value on developer time and lots 
of value on making sure machine power is spared instead of being put to 
use (e.g. decreasing development effort). This is insane, and especially 
insane in a project which runs on people donating their spare time. 
There is no infinite pool of willing C++ programs with infinite spare 
time to donate.

If we have screwed up somewhere, then it is in communicating what the 
state of the art actually is, and what this means for a FOSS project 
like ours, not just in technical terms, but also in social terms.

(I should blog about this...)

cheers,

-- 
Simon Edwards             | KDE-NL, Guidance tools, Guarddog Firewall
simon at simonzone.com       | http://www.simonzone.com/software/
Nijmegen, The Netherlands | "ZooTV? You made the right choice."