Re: Announcing DNF 3 development
On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 8:26 AM, Martin Sehnoutka <msehnout(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 03/26/2018 01:38 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 7:22 AM, Matěj Cepl <mcepl(a)cepl.eu> wrote:
>> On 2018-03-26, 10:52 GMT, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>> On 03/22/2018 01:40 PM, Daniel Mach wrote:
>>>> Please read more details on our blog:
>>>>
https://rpm-software-management.github.io/announcement/2018/03/22/dnf-3-a...
>>>
>>> “C++ 11 is supported by GCC in RHEL 7 / CentOS 7” — You should
>>> use Developer Toolset to compile on Red Hat Enterprise Linux
>>> 7 if you need C++11 support. The system compiler, GCC 4.8,
>>> has limited support only.
>>
>> When switching the programming langauge than I would think there
>> are some better C-successors than C++, namely Rust? Mad rush of
>> giving up on 46 years old language and switching to one which is
>> just 33 years old seems a bit bizarre to me.
>>
Take a look into the code, it is mostly C with few features from C++.
btw what is the motivation to use GOBjects? Is the libdnf api supposed
to be consumed by dnf frontend via gi repository?
It was a thought a while ago with libhif, and as part of the final
rationalization for libdnf, it's being dropped. Because libdnf is
going to be in C++, it's going to use SWIG for bindings generation.
>
> I'm okay with not dealing with LLVM for my system package manager,
> thank you very much. I'd be more open to Rust if Rust also could be
> built with GCC, and thus supported across literally everything, but no
> one is investing in that effort.
>
Well, investment like this will need some justification, not saying that
dnf should be the one, but you will definitely need a big, important
project.
Considering all the other "big important things" people don't invest
in anyway, I don't think that'd help any.
> And frankly, Rust is harder to program in than C++, and creating
> bindings is no walk in the park.
>
Purely personal opinion. You are probably referring to the learning
curve, which is known to be steep, but after this period it is well
worth the effort.
Not my personal opinion. That's the opinion of several developers I
know who are working on Rust based projects. Not everyone gets the
benefit of GNOME forcing all the things so that stuff _must_ work.
Regarding the bindings, if libdnf is meant to be used via gir (see
my
question above), then there is already an effort to make this much
easier (I'm referring to gnome-class).
As I noted earlier in this email, gir is a leftover and is being removed.
--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!