X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Sat, 23 Jul 2016 15:30:48 +0200 (CEST)
X-X-Sender:	igor2 AT igor2priv
To:	"Vladimir Zhbanov (vzhbanov AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
X-Debug:	to=geda-user AT delorie DOT com from="gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu"
From:	gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] [OT] ngspice integration in KiCad
In-Reply-To:	<20160723125139.GG17595@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID:	<alpine.DEB.2.00.1607231521380.7286@igor2priv>
References:	<CANqhZFwC48g07MUY411a20C5oipkmmkzUimhz8OgvL2Thi-yDg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20160722171754 DOT GB17595 AT localhost DOT localdomain> <CAM2RGhRjABmejtuSz1PbGFFF+EHhznGGTODoh0bu2y4FJM=Cbw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20160723065723 DOT GC17595 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1607231009290 DOT 7286 AT igor2priv> <20160723125139 DOT GG17595 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
User-Agent:	Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version:	1.0
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

On Sat, 23 Jul 2016, Vladimir Zhbanov (vzhbanov AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 10:59:10AM +0200, gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu wrote:
> ...
> OK, let's continue
>
> No, it is not unrelated. You and some other people try to present
> things in such a vision. This is not the topic I thought up. It is

The thread you hijacked for your scheme evangelization had nothing to do 
with scheme or programming languages. It was you who brought in this 
aspect. Please read back.

<snip>
> OK, I was the same developer as you. Half a year I was waiting for
> contributions. I haven't changed C code to not favour Scheme. I

Sorry to say, but this is pure arrogance. The backbone of your reasoning 
is the assumption of the Ultimate Truth that scheme is better than C. You 
didn't know it but you got enlighted at some point, but, ah, the poor, 
stupid other developer is still stuck with C! No problem, he will once 
realize the truth.

There's no such thing. You love scheme, it worked for you. I tried it too, 
it didn't work for me, and I don't love scheme. Many people walked your 
way and many people walked mine. Neither way is the absolute truth.

The languages I love you probably don't. I could write, with the same 
arrogance, that you don't like them because you didn't learn them the 
right way or didn't spend enough time with them, etc, and with age you 
would realize the Real Truth and give up scheme in favor of 
<my-favorite-language>. But the truth is only that you happen to like 
scheme and I don't. And this factor is totally subjective, no matter how 
hard you try to prove that scheme is superior to C or anything else.

The rest of my reasoning was more about how the current percentage of 
"happen to like scheme" among users and potential contributors, how the 
actual maintenance issues of guile, and other pretty much objective 
factors may affect geda's future. I'm sorry that you fail to see these 
aspect because the love-or-hate-scheme thing narrows down your vision to 
this one aspect. This is exactly the mechanism I was talking about: no way 
to discuss whether scheme is a good thing in geda or not, because 
selective hearing of devs/power-users, thus if it turns out it's not the 
good choice there's no chance to fix it. And then you repeatedly ask me 
for contribution, right? And this is totally different than if I ask you 
for contribution on my projects, on which I believe in C and not scheme, 
right?

- Raw text -