X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=1zTwNPlBUlXBlMlGJbOh+SiBFKazffYpyvdAj7hiSkc=;
	b=0LyN5jQiOQzolffW1cDBG76O+zzxebij5aE+UzE2fYNxXeKdV8AYwFCWQjxOG2/MtN
	goW9b0qVcqDLFrk7nzxjhyaJFfW9rWVZNXZxiK+TUPoG4MJMgjJcRk7pU54n6SEuagXj
	LpOSdLXderPEj/ybEHj5X1xJEv7XV+XOwwsJoGdCUX3oOXCrzUL26ixwrzIS5faP5M8a
	tLSQGmt2sp9K+jl1/iS29RPsgK3As5eEVrxGqOvAxKYb/5eRey2xyxUvclmv1Pf6a2fD
	YcSCAOOrPUl1LY5X/g5LPTbqKav9jxBdafEqdRliA3/G88pMkCq+4e2cixkzcs+GKmcK
	YdmA==
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Received:	by 10.112.212.9 with SMTP id ng9mr42984628lbc.57.1436066930525;
	Sat, 04 Jul 2015 20:28:50 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To:	<20150705021010.369968038A2C@turkos.aspodata.se>
References:	<1435510363 DOT 682 DOT 26 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de>
	<20150703030409 DOT 32398 DOT qmail AT stuge DOT se>
	<CAM2RGhSb=z35RYaJQmh-S4N73ng9WOj4ySmy_05J-7KGdBv8SA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<CAOP4iL3VBaS+bJhKJDk=_iuBSjDPY2-pvMdz5zPnf7A_rwD0Jw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20150703191532 DOT GB21182 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1507040542390 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv>
	<20150705021010 DOT 369968038A2C AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se>
Date:	Sun, 5 Jul 2015 03:28:50 +0000
Message-ID:	<CAM2RGhTRQCA5D=1XB2yELZ47nF9uu247CbJjOrJ82EJMNwPAfw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] gEDA/gschem still alive?
From:	"Evan Foss (evanfoss AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id t653Su4C017733
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

The community of developers had a different make up 4 years ago. My
opinion on things is somewhere between John Dotty who is asking for
people to use rigger in PCB and is still developing using Scheme and
Igor2 who acknowledges that Scheme is harder to find developers for.

Imagine if the source was written in PL/I. How much development in the
future would you expect it to get?

On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 2:10 AM,  <karl AT aspodata DOT se> wrote:
> Igor2:
>> On Fri, 3 Jul 2015, Vladimir Zhbanov (vzhbanov AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
>>
>> > On Fri, Jul 03, 2015 at 08:32:01AM -0700, Ouabache Designworks (z3qmtr45 AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
> ...
>> >> You also have the big issues like the choice of scheme as gEDAs scripting
>> >> language and the gEDA file formats. Is there anything to gain by changing
>> >> and if so then what would be better and how do we transition?
> ...
>> I think there's another side of this story.
>>
>> Current situation is that scheme being the only language at some parts of
>> project. Many others, including me, suggest there could be support
>> for other languages as well, or if that's not possible, at least more of
>> the core functionality should be moved from scheme to C so that bindings
>> to other languages are possible.
> ...
>> When writing new code, wherever possible consider using C instead of
>> scheme. If anyone later on tries to provide bindings for another
>> languages, he needs to do the C <-> scriptlang binding, and doesn't need
>> to reproduce scheme code in C or another language and doesn't need to do
>> scheme <-> scriptlang bindings.
>
> Scheme is preferred to C, as this thread shows:
>
>  http://archives.seul.org/geda/user/May-2011/msg00556.html
>
> Regards,
> /Karl Hammar
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Aspö Data
> Lilla Aspö 148
> S-742 94 Östhammar
> Sweden
> +46 173 140 57
>
>



-- 
Home
http://evanfoss.googlepages.com/
Work
http://forge.abcd.harvard.edu/gf/project/epl_engineering/wiki/

- Raw text -