Re: pl/Ruby, deprecating plPython and Core

On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 05:09:24PM -0400, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On 8/16/05, David Fetter <david@fetter.org> wrote:
> > It's not.  In PL/parlance, "trusted" means "prevented from ever
> > opening a filehandle or a socket," and PL/PythonU is called
> > PL/Python*U* (U for *un*trusted) because it cannot be so
> > prevented.
> > 
> > If somebody has figured out a way to make a PL/Python (without the
> > U), that's great, but nothing has happened on this front in a
> > couple of years, and Guido said that it was a problem with the
> > language that he wasn't going to fix.
> 
> It's not a problem in the *language*, it's a problem in the
> implementation. There are other implementations of python, including
> one inside the JavaVM.

Great!  We're all looking forward to your patch which implements
PL/Python as you've suggested. :)

> Yes, it's a problem, yes it should be fixed.  But it is BS to claim
> that python fundamentally has a problem and needs to be removed
> because of it,

Python has other fundamental problems as far as I'm concerned ;)

> just as much as it would be BS to claim that ruby should forbidden
> because it permits the same sort of unmaintainable syntax that has
> plagued perl for years. :)

As with an automatic weapon, Perl absolutely *requires* discipline to
use properly.  Unlike an automatic weapon, Perl is perfectly OK to use
day-to-day in civilian life :)

Cheers,
D
-- 
David Fetter david@fetter.org http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 510 893 6100   mobile: +1 415 235 3778

Remember to vote!