Quoth JanWieck@Yahoo.com (Jan Wieck):
> On 11/13/2004 12:06 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
>>>
>>> It is never the fault of a programming language per se. People with
>>> a good understanding of object design will write "object oriented
>>> code" in every language, even assembler. People who just don't know
>>> what they are doing will write bad code, and the best Pascal
>>> compiler in the world won't be able to prevent that.
>> Yes but I believe even you would agree that their are programming
>> languages that are better for certain tasks than others. The use of
>> java as a replication engine for PostgreSQL seems, well... incorrect.
>
> Mammoth is written in C, the followup for eRServer will be C (++?) and
> Slony is C ... I guess disagreeing would be, well ... ignorant.
Sure, but I seem to recall that your Slony-I prototype was initially
in Tcl. There may be a Perl-based prototype of one of the new bits,
and if bottlenecks aren't evident, I'm not convinced everything has to
stay in C.
I don't think I'd propose Ada (Andrew Sullivan would be aghast! ;-)),
but I could see Perl or Python being reasonable languages for handling
processes where the _real_ bottlenecks lie in database access.
--
"cbbrowne","@","linuxfinances.info"
http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/x.html
"If Ada became the hot, in-language you would see a lot more bad code
in Ada."
-- Thaddeus L. Olczyk <olczyk@interaccess.com>, comp.lang.C++