X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at neurotica.com X-NSA-prism-xkeyscore: I do not consent to surveillance, prick DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=neurotica.com; s=default; t=1423167283; bh=wB4mRzzs2TyGTBClPYNo2HVBhMiCQjaTpAwWLwEgNmI=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=hSOg3ZjewNioPs6npuMMGrYnb3ntA/s9PwCf7EzMqYx7f/UkbLdNIj8A8v+gSrpeQ v793V37CaGttulotkeAYtTZWDbuHW+iaAMbEw6l7tsFMFe1Y34BgtrEEsRRMZ5sGBr qS3nd66HJIX1erBxoMlCQ+73/Psjm+0uNGsichOs= Message-ID: <54D3CF33.3000104@neurotica.com> Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 15:14:43 -0500 From: Dave McGuire User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: [geda-user] FOSDEM References: <1420499386 DOT 3521 DOT 3 DOT camel AT cam DOT ac DOT uk> <20150202152654 DOT GA13336 AT cuci DOT nl> <54CFD589 DOT 9040702 AT xs4all DOT nl> <20150203112631 DOT 3507a0c1 AT Parasomnia DOT thuis DOT lan> <20150204054256 DOT Horde DOT Pm1JV8RJbICk9SHvIGwZ7A3 AT webmail DOT in-berlin DOT de> <20150204193720 DOT Horde DOT 42xUN-NzhCJRWZne-M5eCQ1 AT webmail DOT in-berlin DOT de> <90236728-E79D-47C7-BFB1-34140DB85ACB AT sbcglobal DOT net> <54D3B04A DOT 3080308 AT neurotica DOT com> <54D3B7FF DOT 7010401 AT neurotica DOT com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com On 02/05/2015 02:42 PM, mskala AT ansuz DOT sooke DOT bc DOT ca wrote: >> It's pretty clear that you simply don't like Scheme. That's fine, >> just keep it out of this thread. > > Please keep personal characterization out of both the thread and the list. > I'm talking about the technology, and I think "that's for toys!" is > a poor basis for the project to make decisions on scripting languages. Don't start. I can be a far bigger jerk than you, and get there a lot faster, even on my worst day. My point behind the "that's for toys!" argument, which I thought I had made clearly but I was probably just typing pre-coffee, was that Lua has an image problem. It is a good language, and would make a reasonable extension/scripting language for gEDA, if we were even really thinking of moving away from Scheme. My concern is that Lua's image problem would become gEDA's image problem. Some of us, actually many of us, are using gEDA for more than play-toy personal projects. Often, customers ask "So, are you using Cadence or Altium?" This puts us in an awkward position, in which we are called upon to justify our choices for what tools we use. Now, nobody in their right mind would say something like that to the guy being paid to work on their car's transmission or the guy fixing their plumbing, but it happens in our world all the time, and we have to deal with it or go hungry. Adding "that gaming language" to the system would only make that situation worse. Many people outside of hard-core theoretical computing types have never heard of Scheme, so that gives us the opportunity to explain what it is, should the conversation go that far. "It's a simple, elegant language out of MIT with roots in the AI research world" goes a lot farther towards credibility than "It's the scripting language for World of Warcraft". -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ/3 New Kensington, PA