Mail Archives: geda-user/2012/11/18/15:41:47
On Nov 18, 2012, at 12:54 PM, Bob Paddock wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Dave McGuire <mcguire AT neurotica DOT com> wrote:
>> On 11/18/2012 06:41 AM, John Doty wrote:
>>> Unfortunately, it's written in Haskell,
>
> Whats wrong wit Haskell, or for that mater Erlang (my preferred
> functional language)?
Functional programming seems to be my natural style. This gets me into trouble with physics colleagues who want everything to look like FORTRAN. ;-) The problem with Haskell for me isn't notation, but the category theory lurking in the background. I've written significant programs in literally dozens of languages, and Haskell is the only one I've put significant study effort into but come up unable to use. Maybe I'm just getting too old. :(
>
>>> which effectively means that
>>> only its author can write back ends for it.
>
> If he wrote it in such a way that only he can understand it, that has
> nothing to do with it being in Haskell.
I don't think anyone who knows Haskell has ever tried. But a gEDA core developer has told me that he'd want to include it in gEDA releases if it wasn't in Haskell.
>
>
>> The one comment I will make about the use of Guile in gschem is in the
>> context of config files. Config files should not be executable
>> programs.
>
> That was not fixed a long time ago (I pay more attention to PCB than
> the rest of the tools)? I know there was a bug report filed on it and
> some work done due that being a security risk. "Config files should
> be parsed, not executed".
>
Given the amount of attention this issue has gotten from the core developers over the years, I conclude that the fix is difficult.
John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
http://www.noqsi.com/
jpd AT noqsi DOT com
- Raw text -