Re: gEDA-user: broken if gschem switched to another scripting language, I mean.

[Stefan Salewski <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, 2009-11-21 at 17:12 -0600, John Griessen wrote:
> Bill Gatliff wrote:
> > Stuart Brorson wrote:
> 
> >> However, there is a large installed base of scheme
> > 
> > Is there?  Could we get a show of hands as to who is doing a significant
> > quantity of scheme programming in their use of gEDA?  Stuff that might
> > get broken if gschem switched to another scripting language, I mean.
> 
> I occasionally work on getting gnucap verilog back end working better.
> that's in scheme.
> 
> John
> 
> PS  all the gnetlist back ends are scheme.
> 
> 
> _

This question may show my ignorance -- again.

Why have we so much scheme in gEDA?
I know that scheme may be useful for scripting/extending gEDA. (Today
many people may prefer more modern languages like Ruby, Python,...)
But large integral parts of gEDA software is done in scheme? Is scheme
so much more powerful than C? Many people hate scheme/guile -- since
some days I am one of these, trying some hours to get gwave2 to work on
gentoo, without success. I really wonder why gwave needs scheme. Some
(german) people really wonder why gEDA config files are scheme.




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