X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Ironport-SBRS: None
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A2GCBQCFKJxV/52AA4BbgxKBNIJSqGMBAQEBAQUBgQSZGAKBXjwQAQEBAQEBAQOBB4QkAQEEOk8LGAkTEg8FSROILgXMcgErhh2ELIEChQ2DF4EUBY0Lhw2LaJhbJoQbHjGCSwEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,425,1432623600"; 
   d="scan'208";a="94161474"
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2015 12:33:04 -0700
From: Larry Doolittle <ldoolitt AT recycle DOT lbl DOT gov>
To: "Dave McGuire (mcguire AT neurotica DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: [geda-user] gEDA/gschem still alive?
Message-ID: <20150707193304.GA14821@recycle.lbl.gov>
References: <1436006726 DOT 677 DOT 13 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de>
 <20150706200609 DOT GD24178 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
 <CAC4O8c9f0pLsLu_dyuO5ggh7RmHY1vAA=UUhk9AE0JYZb4mhBQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <CAM2RGhQfPO31-1Uyc3kC7w286r0VD7c41UZEZcyYquzknCxbsQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <20150707060409 DOT GB14357 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
 <CAOP4iL2C_LU=RQy5FWYF-7RrHW6tqhqqyFJGjkwLQ2AD7FiYJA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <1436287952 DOT 678 DOT 26 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de>
 <559C0F7E DOT 7010009 AT neurotica DOT com>
 <1436293439 DOT 678 DOT 71 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de>
 <559C24B4 DOT 3040007 AT neurotica DOT com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <559C24B4.3040007@neurotica.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
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 Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 03:12:52PM -0400, Dave McGuire (mcguire AT neurotica DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
>   All of that is purely subjective.  FOR ME, yes, C is nearly the
> ultimate in fun.  My C code has far fewer bugs than my code in nearly
> any other language, my code size (the binary...which is all that really
> matters!) is a fraction of anything else, and "better"...well that just
> spells "subjective" right there.

There's a lot to like about Python etc.  But C is an established
ISO standard.  I have C code that I wrote 20 years ago that runs
flawlessly.  Can't say that about Python.  The best you can do is
claim that since Python is open-source and written in C, you can
freeze an arbitrary Python version and run it forever.  But that
is somewhat impractical, given the goals of grabbing python modules
from wherever, and given the size of its code base.

I'd like to see at least one of Python, Lua, Nim, Julia, ... reach
the level of maturity and stability that we have in C today.  But
that clearly won't happen quickly.  And it's hard to crystal-ball
gaze and figure out which one deserves our brain cells today.

For all the javascript bashing I heard here, I'd like to point out
that it, too, shows up as an ISO/IEC standard.

  - Larry