Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 22:10:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org> To: Devin Teske <dteske@freebsd.org> Cc: FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, Dirk Engling <erdgeist@erdgeist.org>, Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: FreeBSD installers and future direction Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.64.1305262202001.24578@sea.ntplx.net> In-Reply-To: <13CA24D6AB415D428143D44749F57D7201F61FE0@ltcfiswmsgmb21> References: <51A0DC3F.9030301@cran.org.uk> <CAK6u07WDZrWU4dnrBzQGYf%2BpbmibK7KxSUZyvie8jJQ1SMODuw@mail.gmail.com> <51A1025A.2020607@cran.org.uk> <51A14445.4060305@freebsd.org> <51A15EDF.6050600@erdgeist.org> <13CA24D6AB415D428143D44749F57D7201F5B2E7@ltcfiswmsgmb26> <51A29A5F.7010106@erdgeist.org> <13CA24D6AB415D428143D44749F57D7201F61FE0@ltcfiswmsgmb21>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 27 May 2013, Teske, Devin wrote:
>
> I don't think there's any reason why we have to write it in C if we can write
> it in sh.
I don't really care one way or the other (C or sh), but
I can say that I can understand(*) well structured C a lot
better than well structured sh. Having something more
strongly typed certainly helps understanding.
(*) Assuming some level of complexity (I know that's
subjective).
--
DE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.64.1305262202001.24578>