On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 06:32:55PM +0200, Thomas Goettlicher wrote:
From a programmer's perspective it makes a difference. And "just" adding a debugger won't make YCP the best language everyone loves, I guess. That's the reason why I think we should put YCP into maintenance mode and fix critical/major bugs only and focus on real improvements at the same time.
The point is not to fix YCP to the point we would love it. That would be futile. The point is realizing that even though we strive for refactoring YaST into a better shape using a better language, we are still left with maintaining the enterprise releases. And they use YCP and the more or less horrible code. That's why I think investing a limited effort in a debugger will pay off.
An interesting research project would be a YaST module which is written in a popular language that doesn't use YCP at all.
That's not merely interesting. That is a fundamental requirement to keep YaST healthy.
When this works out a lot of module authors will also rewrite their YaST modules. And in a couple of centuries YaST will be 100% YCP free. :-)
As Johannes said, people are not eager to completely rewrite software just for fun. I think we will see a gradual refactoring where it makes sense. Given the shape of YCP libraries, I think it will make sense in an awful lot of places ;-) -- Martin Vidner, YaST developer http://en.opensuse.org/User:Mvidner Kuracke oddeleni v restauraci je jako fekalni oddeleni v bazenu