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=20161025;
	h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references
	:mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding
	:in-reply-to:user-agent;
	bh=QA1pqAFqi5lA8EPI8uPnyitrmZSnysjz6aHwFeh5i30=;
	b=RmqR6s86AJvJGNmWZZ4HYIR0Hfkn3O8fDDDhsdx11RoEhOMirq13gvJClOtFr4YNan
	hcU7PvHhCDRrkwqS1NdTZBOHlGSGvFEv++cSDjQenWgp7vUSMNiUc3tlXTSM2Vc5HyKz
	xIJ5DHF9wO+SZf8Nj/vGGlFQBK9OGQZXltTJAeuLX7RFzUPOMbSQ3hgn3Y8iLij3LaCv
	C9lBDJ3YImCZaCZvQAxFxjl5zwEz9dc3FHfLgFcnsgOH2C/x8gOCgBhMGKe+/cUL2AJ8
	9rlt3ebVlJAQlFRiUmNTqOhtmhMQRyt2oYCkbrx1B9wt7VyoTxx0GoI/LnP5qnZw5Epp
	aD6A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
	h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to
	:references:mime-version:content-disposition
	:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:user-agent;
	bh=QA1pqAFqi5lA8EPI8uPnyitrmZSnysjz6aHwFeh5i30=;
	b=HR8trPPbGHnePSx+HqvYfNFz/k+OdFPliRgvdAE9xs0zruMMqK0KHm1X7T8kpzhQ6V
	Og2uOMGC4pj8gsogmOR5rhLuE32+ooViyMR8f2ZNPQnV90ETF3bDVGHkIwoxyLfhKfkL
	q55QIK1PZ6nIwGXBKgNuoHXkdhxXHxhjzueuCvG127vJuL4DWgYvOqESbfIZZMp69ptB
	0ppbhyNYjBS6bwPXDRPmpniTyplRS7AQvuRh4/SyP8yp7+yFFfEiSevS0CgKsSgNkygD
	8rFi5dCvYrgmSAal7E10cqeFKQBu5oBSd/z3JBxtrZgdPJFeyEUZFKpZIgaGNSjf1hJR
	sZVA==
X-Gm-Message-State:	AIVw111wzcIq8j+TJyCpGvueFx1MICauyNBSLBzcT2VvSt075Sh2VriO
	qma+EjKJmJmXZVPM
X-Received:	by 10.25.43.73 with SMTP id r70mr9930916lfr.135.1499458199892;
	Fri, 07 Jul 2017 13:09:59 -0700 (PDT)
Date:	Fri, 7 Jul 2017 23:09:57 +0300
From:	"Vladimir Zhbanov (vzhbanov AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] Refdes= mangling
Message-ID:	<20170707200957.GD14953@localhost.localdomain>
Mail-Followup-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
References:	<CAMvDHVCoOGz0JZ8KgAkzdzZJe6F1Q+eV--obH8QURAfNveGQCA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 20 DOT 1707061435520 DOT 1612 AT nimbus>
	<228610BF-A7B9-4562-A6A7-ECDFC5C051B2 AT noqsi DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 20 DOT 1707062009120 DOT 1442 AT nimbus>
	<F9CD7D04-ED74-4E0E-A1E0-54A24DE37703 AT noqsi DOT com>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<F9CD7D04-ED74-4E0E-A1E0-54A24DE37703@noqsi.com>
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

On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 02:33:35PM -0600, John Doty wrote:
> 
> On Jul 6, 2017, at 12:26 PM, Roland Lutz <rlutz AT hedmen DOT org> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 6 Jul 2017, John Doty wrote:
> >> Is there anybody except you that understands how to write a back end for your gnetlist?
> > 
> > By now, the refactored code is 100% compatible with existing Scheme code. That is, you don't have to write a backend any differently than you did before.
> 
> But that’s no advance.
> 
> > 
> >> He’s using our traditional foundation, Scheme
> > 
> > Scheme is not "our traditional foundation", it's something which has been patched onto gEDA/gaf in an ugly way.  It seems to work for some people but it definitively doesn't make maintaining the code an easier task.
> 
> A valid criticism, but Vladimir is moving the boundary so that more functionality is implemented in Scheme. That’s especially helpful to me because more is therefore exposed to customization.
> 
> > 
> >> to refactor and improve both schematic capture and netlisting.
> > 
> > That is what I don't get: I already did this, and if you could be bothered to look at the result, you had to agree that it is much easier both to understand and to use with your own code (formerly nearly unthinkable) than the old gnetlist code.
> 
> I *did* look at the result. It was not easier for *me* to understand (obviously it is for you).
> 
> > 
> > It took me a lot of time and effort to bring it into a well-readable form while keeping it perfectly functionally equivalent.  I don't have the impression that Vladimir is even trying to achieve this with his current approach.
> 
> To a Schemer, Vladimir’s approach is more transparent. But the real question is whether either approach will attract add-on authors the way Ales’s Scheme API did.

Roland, John,
Thank you both for your criticism.

John, thank you for your support!

I agree that the issue of creating of a convenient and useful API
is very important (incindentially, just now I'm watching a SICP
lesson touching this problem :-)). Good API and good documentation
have the advantage over code readability (IMO, after using LaTeX
and reading the code of some its packages). That does not mean
that I don't care about code readability and comments ;-)

-- 
  Vladimir

- Raw text -