X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        bh=VcOph33jQ2Z5hF2xqOQ5wwIj/TckaWRRLFK39nRdBHw=;
        b=xCNCQlx6bMDrVGoA0JNuVWxYUxKGRDquoSUvE0jT0rXjSQC6ysEwRFaD3KL6cLrkJC
         69yO++kUbVwJXIxTvXq9KgppHGGE9xQvckHtwk78e4ZgebofVSWECEsCVr0T85/bx1WW
         6zodYf/EEO3aEbG8CwrPUt8Fpvdtoj8UZxorf1tSQNpWwcZxrUE56WT1zEZqm6qAqL8L
         Xl0tDMmXAVgKO8PD1SyV0Rp3rmNbOtoISBbRwujoXFeM0dCOSPaKBnioOr9TlKwi8gbC
         MSeP5+f/Bujmmnd/Im2GGrXWEd+f3iSZ4rkjNvPkKyzzw2aavBIoL1we13Y0tyOA7MXe
         +CSg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <50AB223C.3020207@neurotica.com>
References: <50A688B8 DOT 4090809 AT neurotica DOT com>
	<50A6A95C DOT 5030903 AT neurotica DOT com>
	<355DEF4F-51BB-44A8-A5F4-D8564E7E7885 AT noqsi DOT com>
	<20121116213601 DOT 13718 DOT qmail AT stuge DOT se>
	<66889AAB-3A82-4861-ACB0-B35A876EF6F4 AT noqsi DOT com>
	<CAC4O8c8s3837dD5so1hu-QOm8PW69sehVNNX7njQvnRGzXODGw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<B63F900B-2C12-48A4-AD4B-5A616078030B AT noqsi DOT com>
	<CAC4O8c9BAJe8_7KLL8aaGq30HCkj+q74DB9jywXRXogJzdqNzw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<50A83AAA DOT 6060500 AT jump-ing DOT de>
	<B1A7C9C1-5EAE-49AB-A03A-D5D4AFD3B0C0 AT noqsi DOT com>
	<50A8615E DOT 2080800 AT neurotica DOT com>
	<05730E0F-4DA1-47C8-80BB-5D4F37EFD94E AT noqsi DOT com>
	<50A8675D DOT 30509 AT neurotica DOT com>
	<CAM2RGhQ7aZf_yiOw4ibKTe5RnH7p8W50Maqo1YrVnLbJuhX-1Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<F9FB3DFD-3D4D-4744-81E8-172D48E96FE0 AT noqsi DOT com>
	<CAM2RGhSkaqZUKpwZhTcJgTwMGMRjRm7gkYwGB=nBA38PCkBSQQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<CAGde_xPHE8A--poeUARmD14YFtxeH7HrEtzCX3YUFZmEkH9+Yw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<50A95721 DOT 7080704 AT neurotica DOT com>
	<CAC4O8c9CLcwET1D+dqsjYDvWCu6mYBSC5E-LFt5gciACoKU=6g AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<50AB223C DOT 3020207 AT neurotica DOT com>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 10:39:59 -0900
Message-ID: <CAC4O8c8_8q919o=C26qtbgaPaBaNHV+WanTz=34hhDokSaHjug@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Thoughts on gschem UI
From: Britton Kerin <britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
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
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Dave McGuire <mcguire AT neurotica DOT com> wrote:
> On 11/19/2012 09:18 PM, Britton Kerin wrote:
>>>   If gEDA moves to Perl as its scripting language, I'm going back to
>>> pencil and paper.
>>
>> Perl                          vs   Lisp
>>
>> one working implementation         ~4 different half finished ones
>> weird syntax                       weird undocumented metaprogramming
>> nice module repository             no repository, just use google :)
>> embeddable                         depends which one you use
>> extensible (call C)                I have no idea
>> one monolithic community           ~4 tiny communities
>> works fine in vi                   emacs MUCH more painful to extend IME
>>
>> Language snobbery aside, lisp really doesn't have much going for it.
>
>   And the PerlTribesmen descend with fire and sword.  So predictable.
>
>   I won't even dignify it.

Well, you started it.  Myself I don't care what language a plugin or extension
is written in, I'd vote for letting it in if its useful.  All that's required
is that developers not strive to maintain some illusion about the level of
maintenance of every part of the system.  They shouldn't do this, since no
one's going to believe it anyway so it pointlessly warps their decision-making.

>>>   Lisp is used by the ones with long history, but it CONTINUES to be
>>> used there because it's a very good tool for the job.  Autodesk isn't
>>> dumping Autolisp for Perl or Ruby. ;)
>>
>> Its all just momentum.  Nobody is putting it in anything new today.
>
>   Of course.  And that's obviously also why the Linux kernel hasn't been
> rewritten in Perl. (as has been suggested by other PerlTribesmen)

You're painting the PerlTribesmen with pretty broad brush strokes here.
My point was that its almost never worth rewriting things in a more (or less)
Divinely Blessed language, and therefore the continued existence of Lisp is
no evidence of its intrinsic superiority.

Incidentally, Pcb_9.pm is one chunk of gEDA that I'd most hate to lose.
Its non-buggy, feature-complete, and well documented.  I'd guess that losing
the perl-java-etc.-not-welcome-here view would be beneficial.

Britton