Re: gEDA-user: Reinventing the wheel

[Stefan Salewski <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 19:26 +0200, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
> Russell Shaw wrote:
> 
> > I think Scheme could be made much more attractive in geda if
> > it was adequately explained in documentation or a tutorial.
>  
> +1
> I wouldn't mind to learn (a new language). But to learn a new language by 
> almost non-commented code is just too much of a barrier. 
> 
> ---<)kaimartin(>---

The problem in not only missing documentation, but the fact that not all
geda guile code is really clean and beautiful, as stated by one of the
experts some time ago on this list. I don't know if that is true, but I
have seen that even experts had to work hard to make small improvements.
I think that learning lisp/scheme/guile is an interesting (academic)
task. But I think that gEDA is not a really good point to start
learning, because: 1. the C-guile interaction and 2. the risk of
breaking something.

And finally: It is hard to see the real benefit of mixing c and guile in
geda for simple people like me. For PCB C plugins seem to work fine.
Guile may be really fine for writing extensions/exporters, but very few
people really do it. And guile itself seems to be not a masterpiece of
software -- gentoo package maintainers have to struggle with version
conflicts, guile is not used much at all (OK, gimp has guile script
support).




_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user