Re: using git directory cache code in darcs?

[Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>]

>>>>> "NA" == Nomad Arton <lkml@lazy.shacknet.nu> writes:

NA> Linus Torvalds schrieb:
>> In fact, one of my hopes was that other SCM's could just use the git
>> plumbing. But then I'd really suggest that you use "git" itself, not any
>> "libgit". Ie you take _all_ the plumbing as real programs, and instead of
>> trying to link against individual routines, you'd _script_ it.

NA> please excuse; libgit and scripting to me arent a contradiction. many
NA> sripting languages are extended by C modules, while still happening to
NA> have all the scripting rapidity. its just a matter of how to
NA> communicate with the C code, isnt it?

You are arguing for scripting language binding like what Swig
creates.  While that would also be a worthy addition, having
language binding is not the only way to do _script_.

What Linus is saying is that he wants you to talk with git
plumbing by invoking the executables he have, via system(3),
popen(3), etc.

The C-level first has to be libified before you can start
talking about host language bindings but that just started to
happen and is not ready yet.  However, you can use and benefit
from GIT without waiting for that kind of integration, if you
use the "spawning the executables" approach.  I agree with him.