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
X-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=neurotica.com;
	s=default; t=1436309657;
	bh=L3kLuZ+m+jcmvYhrekqR5TpSkGbze/QsNHvzfsoiCv4=;
	h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To;
	b=VYyWeQBxoBSHEp6kR7xL5U+i6MI7tfU3s7E8Py6R3g92tSrQWiDj2ONppzjhnkZ3W
	 nV4FefOs+dNRXM4po0h7xrw9u/JN1oUjnwzc+u3VpVp5ASNtQJExq0pussCX8Jz956
	 N750vckJUWxU1GJjXArZOKQ2Jdhlb8EBz8LVkdGI=
Message-ID: <559C5898.60809@neurotica.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2015 18:54:16 -0400
From: "Dave McGuire (mcguire AT neurotica DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: [geda-user] gEDA/gschem still alive?
References: <20150703030409 DOT 32398 DOT qmail AT stuge DOT se> <CAFC5WMoa2-z6bNca_bQN+jmMR260UBmoJQybUzH=L2TrBpzNNA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <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> <20150707183339 DOT GA1817 AT alpha2> <559C3667 DOT 7030402 AT neurotica DOT com> <1436305751 DOT 678 DOT 145 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de> <6F56FB28-1576-4B94-B7C4-B455B5C0A4CF AT noqsi DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <6F56FB28-1576-4B94-B7C4-B455B5C0A4CF@noqsi.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id t67MsQ7b019829
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com

On 07/07/2015 06:32 PM, John Doty wrote:
> The international language of science 200 years ago was Latin. This wasn’t because it had any great virtue. It was a historical accident.
> 
> Similarly, we are having this discussion in English. Another historical accident. This is hardly a perfect choice, but other choice would exclude more people than English does.
> 
> For common effort, you choose the common language. Once, in technical computing, this was Fortran, Back a few decades I wrote a lot of Fortran although it was not my favorite language. I was, however, building on other people’s work, and they on mine: Fortran was the only sensible choice.
> 
> What is it these days? Well, I know a lot of people who use a lot of different languages, but the one that a majority can use effectively is Python. People who prefer obscure languages like IDL can also use Python. People who prefer C++ can do it, too. Heck, even people who think Clojure is the greatest ever language for the cool people can get work done in Python.

  Sounds to me like...you like Python.

  There are a lot of people who don't.

           -Dave

-- 
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA