On Aug 1, 2009, at 9:21 AM, r wrote: > Well, I see several other problems here as well: > 1. Guile (as a Scheme implementation) is not particularly well > supported, this leads to "dependency hell" and missing/incomplete > wrappers for modern libraries (like gtk2 - not really a problem for > gnetlist but an issue for gschem and others), > 2. Scheme being a simplistic language. Both Perl and Python come with > regexps and easy to use and versatile container types to name a couple > of useful features. > 3. Scheme not being a main stream language (often misinterpreted as a > "parentheses problem"). This makes code written in Scheme not easier > to extend than one written in a primitive but well known language. > > So, from pragmatic POV, I am OK with moving from Guile to something > more practical.
Perhaps not Guile, but we're going to have to keep Scheme around for a long time, because all those back ends are important. It's not that there's a lot of code in them, but they embody a great deal of research into just what each format needs (often the product of "reverse engineering"). And in the particular case of spice-sdb, Stuart has produced really good documentation. Those who want to improve SPICE netlisting would be well advised to read and understand that first. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ [email protected] _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
