Re: [PATCH/POLL] git-format-patch: the default suffix is now .patch, not .txt

Hi,

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007, Steven Grimm wrote:

I looked at that briefly a while ago -- at the prompting of a Windows 
developer friend of mine who has some interest in git -- and it seemed 
like the best thing for portability to non-fork()ing systems would 
probably be a refactor. It looked to me like it'd be possible to 
reorganize the code such that it'd work all in one process with no 
threads or forking or anything. Not *trivial*, mind you, but possible. 
There's nothing in the code path that I saw (I didn't analyze it 
super-thoroughly) that looked like it actually needed to run in 
parallel.

ssh transport comes to mind, as well as paging functionality. Sometimes we 
fork() to catch out-of-memory errors more gracefully.

Of course, the bigger hurdle for a native Windows port is all the shell 
scripts. Mercurial solves that by using Python for all its scripts, 
which at least has a native Windows version that can be installed. I 
wonder if git will/should eventually move its remaining shell scripts to 
Perl for that reason, Perl being git's de facto non-shell scripting 
language of choice.

Yeah, sure. We had no problems with Perl ;-)

Seriously, IMHO bash is a smaller dependency: here you can at least rely 
on which extensions are present (none), and which path-name munging is 
present on Windows (/c/windows).

No, the best is not to migrate shell scripts to Perl, but to C.

Ciao,
Dscho