X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID:	<1436303890.678.123.camel@ssalewski.de>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] gEDA/gschem still alive?
From:	Stefan Salewski <mail AT ssalewski DOT de>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Tue, 07 Jul 2015 23:18:10 +0200
In-Reply-To:	<20150707205018.GC18930@localhost.localdomain>
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>
	<20150707160130 DOT GA18930 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
	<1436289239 DOT 678 DOT 43 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de>
	<20150707205018 DOT GC18930 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
X-Mailer:	Evolution 3.12.11
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 Tue, 2015-07-07 at 23:50 +0300, Vladimir Zhbanov (vzhbanov AT gmail DOT com)
[via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
> Guile Scheme is a high level language, too. And there are GUI
> toolkits for it. However, we don't use them and invent our own wheel,
> probably being afraid of new dependencies. Recall, for instance,
> gwave/gaw, if you're aware of them.

I don't know much about Scheme, but I do know that Lisp dialects are
interesting and powerful languages in general. But I although know that
lisp is generally only teached in CS at university, people with other
technical background may have a hard time to learn it. At least for
younger people it may be hard to find motivation to learn it.

I don't know much about performance of Scheme. For some EDA stuff, PCB
related auto-router or DRC, performance may be important. For simulation
too. So I would choose only a really fast language today.

I should mention one important point against all new languages:
Languages bindings/wrappers. For C libs generally not a big problem,
only some work. For C++ libs it can be hard indeed. Qt, CGAL, BOOST --
all that is far away. So I can understand when people continue using C++
to have these for free.    

- Raw text -