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=date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references
	:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent;
	bh=/Sl98PFN6Lf+5K0QRUxRWnvFTq7Xmj/aKope5Q7XRKY=;
	b=LAiXvO1lbZcEGSSZcTFTTkxHlokKXfMND3HAq+VvggZnwO36RrE3h70XX9pMR/9Pyu
	N0ah0kO4FTG3arrrmtSUqfebvaGdcnvLRCJTfYfjkvEs2dlSVXUlDG1kUn4zu+B0xe2M
	ERb3Ds723fHAHlJlwuab+WjrofO3l2AKaBqbwOuRzW8h+U7AiUPykcMHXRE/i3Ykz3Xy
	azydCTqsVFw8lpk6jMiYdCSKmwyQonbO37gyz1oyXs4jI1MZz5eRrDUvN2C64HgBiwHK
	NvQvRGYTcBjjZ9d+0HZQMAJQcKCkO6PVtnG1dIOJcOeyQDD+6Uz/jgAaWeGie/PcPNAA
	f1lg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
	h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to
	:references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent;
	bh=/Sl98PFN6Lf+5K0QRUxRWnvFTq7Xmj/aKope5Q7XRKY=;
	b=khZLUR7c9jjsE2D3s/ksILbteToUn45QKTQJW+0ypWXGqStps/J0zblYT4lwNIurxt
	fMU0USabZ62OPAcacWl518jW0rl/VqnkBbd50KKD9+M6p/UMXph1T6Y72RapVhMVgI8A
	QoFdA5r5PHNq9tCF3q3tmAKI+H69t2xuTUdLSC4/l0I7XS1m+7lx6FJS/4SOXxSgoEog
	pm/WvE4lrSKU9H+mEk8QgXaPw/Fokm3qghko95nwX1XJIDpRIB59EHAsq0DojusaJpJq
	v2UvL6GmC+N8qHJhdpXRrwKkJ3HVk/TA+KvsQx8w2sSO5vlolZmcrU/iD1lLFETdH108
	pi7A==
X-Gm-Message-State:	AEkoous8JCk99YpHethjwMAWo2nSZQfUNFqtl3EEY6oYPnBwOHInasmalL5AQNGwClYPnw==
X-Received:	by 10.25.169.147 with SMTP id s141mr17925675lfe.203.1470129383322;
	Tue, 02 Aug 2016 02:16:23 -0700 (PDT)
Date:	Tue, 2 Aug 2016 12:16:20 +0300
From:	"Vladimir Zhbanov (vzhbanov AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To:	"Vladimir Zhbanov (vzhbanov AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] [OT] ngspice integration in KiCad
Message-ID:	<20160802091620.GB3728@localhost.localdomain>
Mail-Followup-To:	"Vladimir Zhbanov (vzhbanov AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
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>
	<20160723092248 DOT GF17595 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 11 DOT 1607231423480 DOT 2224 AT nimbus>
	<20160724053502 DOT GM17595 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 11 DOT 1607271434200 DOT 1841 AT nimbus>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<alpine.DEB.2.11.1607271434200.1841@nimbus>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
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

Roland,

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 11:30:56PM +0200, Roland Lutz wrote:
> Hi Vladimir,
> 
> I took a few days off the mailing list and realized just how ridiculous this
> is.  Noone except hardcore Scheme fanboys is pretending that Scheme is even
> a thing any more.

Please look at the FOSDEM-2016 Guile presentations before stating
such odd things.

> The point you're trying to make (Scheme being to C what C is to assembler,
> etc.) was true at a time when there was nothing around like Python, Ruby, or
> Haskell.  In particular, the reasons you brought up for choosing Scheme over
> other languages are even more true for Haskell.  The reason not to use
> Haskell is also the same as for Scheme: users don't want to wrap their minds
> around some crazy programming language in order to get things done.

1) Your statement about language `craziness' is not constructive.

2) You seem to have not gotten my reasons for choosing Scheme
after many repetitions. I've chosen it chiefly because it has
already been the core language of the geda-gaf project.

> Literally the only reason for not immediately removing Guile from gEDA is
> that this would break existing setups.  There is certainly no excuse for
> making gEDA more dependent on Guile.

1) Your statement about `no excuse' is not constructive.

2) That you prefer another language is not the reason to remove
the language you don't like.

> Your're desperately clinging to a dead horse.  Please don't blame others for
> not mounting with you.

1) Your statement about `dead horse' is emotional and not constructive.

2) I don't blame anybody if they prefer their `favorite
languages'. I just see you want *me* to do anything *your* way, as
well as some other users on this list. That is you who stated
something like `I want to establish xorn as the base in gEDA'. You
haven't asked other geda-gaf developers if they agree with your
plan.

3) If you want to remove Guile, it would be more honest to create
your own `official' fork, like Igor2 has done, and do what you
want there rather than earn popularity while other developers make
hard work on the C and Scheme side. Then, some time, when your
fork gets better than the mainline codebase, it could get the
`official gEDA'.

> Roland
> 

-- 
  Vladimir

- Raw text -