Re: Building Matreshka on Windows

["Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>]

On 04/11/2016 09:57, G.B. wrote:
[...]
> Better suited to the task of configuring software translation will be
> a typed, declarative language for handling rules and constants, I'd
> think. A language that "knows" about multiple languages like
> gnatmake knows about Ada. So, it wouldn't be either Ada or Python.

And this is the key point. Should it be a language? Really? If AdaCore 
knows these object languages (Ada, C, C++, Brainf*ck etc), why do they 
need a language to express that knowledge? Why do they need to 
communicate that knowledge to the poor end user? As a programmer I have 
no interest whatsoever in this knowledge. Why don't they let me alone?

Note this same question arises with handling Ada projects. You could try 
to use a language like GNU make to maintain an Ada project. Or you could 
have a non-language tool like gnatmake or AdaGIDE to handle that. What 
works better?

You might say they wanted it be open-ended so that I could add the 
Whitespace language to the list. The answer is no. I am not interested 
in doing this and the percentage of people who potentially may differ 
and would willingly become programmers of the configuration language 
does not pay off the miseries the huge majority of "normal" people have.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de