(This is also why I don't trust configuration languages built by people who _didn't_ observe the years of pain. Cue and jsonnet are notable projects that were able to incorporate a lot of lessons.)
(This is also why I don't trust configuration languages built by people who _didn't_ observe the years of pain. Cue and jsonnet are notable projects that were able to incorporate a lot of lessons.)
With regards to Fuchsia… I used to think building a new OS from the ground up was madness. Now I think _not_ doing that eventually is madness. I'd be a lot happier if Zircon and Fuchsia were done in Rust though…
I do think for an OS/Kernel, it's worth having everything in a memory-safe language, and possibly worth formal verification too, if the very core of it is small enough…
What do you consider the be the justification for three separate implementations of the same build config language? Genuine question. I am not doubting the need for the DSL itself.
If you're looking to embed a scripting language in a Go program, having a embedded language implementation written in Java isn't very useful. And vice versa.
Carry on, Google