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=XG/kviIV1YR6TB4+j8x11c3+H/i04IPHQLqdBqUeXJA=;
        b=SGz7iNZSW3lgHfGWB1rG8cUm+JIqMIhnmsQ18TqzXqCS6Cmk4DYtRqZkRJ1uiXDTIX
         22qrnUfzKLQkijO3t0Y/aiCDep8L0oqER9kl8WA12wZmT3SZmKZD2wPcrzQSHNrbsWcE
         KXax2biSdwjgKCnOHR81FP+uC2I9CDgrQAcHlnHF4krNHmm9xiYSGcvzWKOrYz3GWEeZ
         TmQWoAIp2KY7vMEqh30Kmsnd/g8Uhew2nmmAGaD/tk55fGktEn+tppBrttU2m5zvEBc+
         QDcFOThAjES74UpoXsvtSgTG8dL2cV9tHEVb1MO+KfEV8gkfYOmiaaqMzzYxxMLOw8+A
         f8rQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.64.72 with SMTP id m8mr14323646lbs.41.1445260846949;
 Mon, 19 Oct 2015 06:20:46 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20151018192444.GB2782@localhost.localdomain>
References: <88EA58F5-2B23-498A-9E5B-84054976DBED AT noqsi DOT com>
	<CAM2RGhTPPtqmWVa3=Kf-PeN+WS5Tn4J+D0Ri6R_4OrQOk+LFKQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<4D3CD563-D8EE-4B2A-975A-AC2B573960FF AT noqsi DOT com>
	<CAM2RGhT8WzhwvzFx3Rfv8vN-f=i1=uWuLF+48VygSRtfdzdo-A AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<34B17816-9EA5-45FD-BFB4-9D623A8D3D87 AT noqsi DOT com>
	<CAM2RGhR+K+dvDdXsbk0Y6LN=-7RhhG5wvtG4i0k4+uMgzd=H0w AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<39FF6208-7D45-4DE8-9AEE-1ED1B512705B AT noqsi DOT com>
	<CAM2RGhROpz_3y2JB=xEkEQ3CMHqHJ_WZxqVrbQhP4q2mg40h8g AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<C8AC7729-F0BC-4CFA-95DA-65CCEF10EC4E AT noqsi DOT com>
	<CAM2RGhTSPvQguBwNQRXEnkk5snEWxi0kTe-NXv3x42Xs6Q426Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20151018192444 DOT GB2782 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 09:20:46 -0400
Message-ID: <CAM2RGhQXgdf-Nu5eoGdfxLPg8tHst=yB8S5Ephf0=NObTdokpQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [geda-user] A lesson from gnet-makefile
From: "Evan Foss (evanfoss AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To: gEDA users mailing list <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
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 Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Vladimir Zhbanov (vzhbanov AT gmail DOT com)
[via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 02:54:05AM +0000, Evan Foss (evanfoss AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
> ...
>> We already talked about scheme. As I recall you and I were in
>> agreement that scheme needed to be de-emphasized.
>
> I learned a while ago that any function defined in Guile Scheme can be
> used in C if you declare it in a module as a public one. OTOH, not
> every C function is available to Scheme. So I'm repeating, Scheme is
> underemphasized in geda-gaf. You've probably heard questions of our
> users on how to make some actions available without using gui, just
> using shortkeys for example. If we make all our main C functionality
> available to Scheme, it would be a big step forward and make some of
> those requests solved easily.

This is not part of my de-emphasizing scheme. Ultimately what I am
doing will need a scheme interface. I will leave it to one of the
scheme lovers to do that. People like coding gnetlist backends in
scheme and I am not going to fight that. I never said I wanted to kill
off use of Scheme just have an alternative but that is something I can
wait on until another day. Look at how contentious just doing this has
been, could you imagine the uproar if I tried to do something as
massive as a plugin interface at the same time? I wanted to do this
project but honestly I did not originally intend on starting it right
now. I saw changes coming to the netlisting mechanism and got
concerned at the effect they would have on the long term viability of
the idea.

I also consider having a subset of the C functions visible in Scheme
to be a feature not a limitation. A lot of that stuff should not be
available because it is low level code that out of it's native context
is just clutter. Does scheme really need to be playing with all the X
and other rendering nitty gritty? IMHO the answer is no.

> Cheers,
>   Vladimir



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