
Git's Killer Feature (why it's better than Mercurial) - nickb
http://codemac.net/blog/18/
======
obdurak
I see that Git has indeed advanced, sexier concepts than Hg. However there is
one thing that makes me uncomfortable with Git: Its source code is a bit like
the Linux kernel: written in C, messy, with lots of scripts (including Bash
and Perl scripts). Mercurial's is written in Python. As an Ocaml hacker, I do
not like Python much; however I think a tool such a VCS ought to be written in
a higher-level language than C, even if that means Python. How are we going to
be sure that the Git code doesn't contain nasty buffer overflows? If Python
does not give static type safety, at least it shields against segmentation
faults.

~~~
Xichekolas
Generally you would hope a project is written in whatever the author(s)
excel(s) at. I think that Linus and Co have clearly demonstrated they have a
lot of experience doing C correctly, so you should have some faith that they
know what they are doing.

They might not have similar aptitude with Ocaml or Python. Given enough time,
all bugs are shallow, and Git is becoming popular enough that this becomes
true. After all, Python itself was also written in C, so it is theoretically
at risk to the same things.

~~~
Xichekolas
(I obviously meant "Given enough eyes, ..." above. Not sure what my brain is
doing today, but translating thoughts to keystrokes is definitely not working
correctly.)

------
a-priori
Interesting. I'd never heard of "git add -i" before. I missed that feature
from Darcs.

------
mfenniak
Isn't this exactly like "hg record"?

------
ntoshev
do you get something similar in e.g. Darcs?

~~~
cstejerean
you do. the interactive commits was one of the features I missed from Darcs

