Re: gEDA-user: Switch gschem to another scripting language?

[Peter TB Brett <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:09:16 -0500, Dave McGuire <mcguire@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

> [snip]
>
>  It's certainly much more practical to implement  
> something like that if the high-level data structures are visible to  
> the scripting language in their native representation.

I agree.  Unfortunately, at the moment they are not.

I've got a branch where I'm working on adding a sane, unit-tested, complete
Guile API, but it's kinda stalled.  Maybe I'll take another hack at it over
the Christmas period.

For the record, I like Scheme, and I like Guile because it's got a sane C
API and a good standard library, making it much easier both to add
gEDA-specific functionality at a low level, and to write non-trivial
scripts at a high level.

Regular readers will recall that back in 2008 I had a stab at swapping
Guile for TinyScheme.  I came to the conclusion that if we used TinyScheme
we'd be dooming ourselves to reimplementing half of Guile, badly.

Peter

-- 
Peter Brett <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Remote Sensing Research Group
Surrey Space Centre


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