X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-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=MTueBJAV1wV+vgcNTiTKC8Ts1XrcsK35Q23H94jGaGw=;
	b=Zv2fMPKTtveA50lCTBkNjYVPvGz/SKjBAQILPTmewcAYYapaPi8MEcPheuozSzQ3SF
	ALhVQtlx+hy14/jUqnMfonb6qGp3W7TKVoOiv4M/X3FQNeT1IYjeMtbSxXpY/0s5smZx
	wmh7lHhsxFO7kt505CzS+wRvvjGr2fq5vB7m6CV9EwYTg1S/zdogqMlJn3GXwZemme+G
	SqRZmyX/nXH836fLdAOhfoj3O/n9X/XU494H4+9rBFWyNgrQwGcxMcwtji6HZkFuFi20
	rHOKUU3AWxCHvTxDlyCqqg7J82tVJomn5WMB6ZyfYVvX6NhOgYjC99/wSDstf7CKKit3
	6UhA==
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Received:	by 10.152.37.102 with SMTP id x6mr36944070laj.69.1435948366096;
	Fri, 03 Jul 2015 11:32:46 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To:	<CAM2RGhQuyymEB++nY0tJVP1qxofbx2-C5yPBvBzF5i1gQzk-bw@mail.gmail.com>
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>
	<1435942066 DOT 672 DOT 22 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de>
	<CAM2RGhQuyymEB++nY0tJVP1qxofbx2-C5yPBvBzF5i1gQzk-bw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
Date:	Fri, 3 Jul 2015 18:32:45 +0000
Message-ID:	<CAM2RGhRKbOnTecQhrukd_YXJM8RV++yFisT-o3jdYdqyhgtFdg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] gEDA/gschem still alive?
From:	"Evan Foss (evanfoss AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
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

Stefan, It is very telling that almost none of the symbol generators
or other small scripts and etc written by users and even the
developers use scheme. I see a lot of python, perl and etc.



On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Evan Foss <evanfoss AT gmail DOT com> wrote:
> Ouabache, your distro does not allow for development or unstable versions?
>
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Stefan Salewski <mail AT ssalewski DOT de> wrote:
>> On Fri, 2015-07-03 at 08:32 -0700, Ouabache Designworks
>> (z3qmtr45 AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
>>> You also have the big issues like the choice of scheme as gEDAs
>>> scripting
>>> language and the gEDA file formats. Is there anything to gain by
>>> changing
>>> and if so then what would be better and how do we transition?
>>
>> I know that some people really like scheme. And I do admit that lisp
>> like languages are very powerful and interesting. But they are not very
>> popular by average people.
>>
>> I see the main problem in mixing C and scheme, which makes thinks more
>> complicated. Maybe that mixing was not a bad decision 30 years ago, but
>> today I would prefer only one single language for all. (Python or Ruby
>> seems to be not bad and fast enough, but my impression is that Nim or
>> Crystal are even better choices today.)
>>
>> For File Format: I was thinking about using JSON or YAML beside the
>> gschem format. The effort for that should be very low, but currently I
>> see no big benefit. XML may be an other alternative.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Home
> http://evanfoss.googlepages.com/
> Work
> http://forge.abcd.harvard.edu/gf/project/epl_engineering/wiki/



-- 
Home
http://evanfoss.googlepages.com/
Work
http://forge.abcd.harvard.edu/gf/project/epl_engineering/wiki/

- Raw text -