X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1698" "Tue" "9" "February" "93" "12:24:11" "+0100" "tarjeij@EXTERN.UIO.NO" "tarjeij@EXTERN.UIO.NO" nil "38" "Re: Makeindex reimplementation" "^Date:" nil nil "2"]) Return-Path: Received: from sc.ZIB-Berlin.DE (mailserv) by dagobert.ZIB-Berlin.DE (4.1/SMI-4.0/1.9.92 ) id AA26486; Tue, 9 Feb 93 12:58:05 +0100 Received: from vm.urz.Uni-Heidelberg.de (vm.hd-net.uni-heidelberg.de) by sc.ZIB-Berlin.DE (4.1/SMI-4.0-sc/19.6.92) id AA03663; Tue, 9 Feb 93 12:58:02 +0100 Message-Id: <9302091158.AA03663@sc.zib-berlin.dbp.de> Received: from DHDURZ1 by vm.urz.Uni-Heidelberg.de (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 1514; Tue, 09 Feb 93 12:58:56 CET Received: from DHDURZ1 by DHDURZ1 (Mailer R2.08 R208004) with BSMTP id 9659; Tue, 09 Feb 93 12:58:51 CET Received: from DHDURZ1 by DHDURZ1 (Mailer R2.08 R208004) with BSMTP id 9657; Tue, 09 Feb 93 12:58:48 CET Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 12:24:11 +0100 From: tarjeij@EXTERN.UIO.NO Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project To: Multiple Recipients of Subject: Re: Makeindex reimplementation Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 963 I think this discussion of makeindex is rapidly getting into dangerous waters. I believe very strongly that new components to TeX should be implemented in C. Reasons for doing this. + C is available on almost every platform in the world. GNU C makes a "free" compiler available to almost everybody. Pascal compilers usually cost a lot of money. + C is easier to port than Pascal. Take a look at the TeX change files for various operating systems. When I last ported TeX to VMS through the Pascal-to-C translator with Unix change files I only had to change the PATH separator character. This means that with C a novice has some chance of getting things right; with Pascal there is no use trying. + Most implementors use C (I can't prove this). Why make things more difficult than they have to be? + There is a good chance that patches can be applied by the users or system managers. Unix utilities like diff, patch and make can automate much of the process. Adding change files to this might break things. I don't think that C is the ideal language. However due to a very limited library it is one of the most portable languages available. Pleas be careful when choosing implementation language. Will the selection make it easier for the user or cause her/him to go somewhere else for a solution? Will it mean that I have to endure errors that I know how to fix due to lack of the right compiler? Greetings, // Tarjei T. Jensen - if it ain't broken, fix it anyway! // tarjeij@ulrik.uio.no || +47 4 563411 // Support you local rescue centre: GET LOST! // Working, but not speaking for the Norwegian Hydrographic Service.