David Feuer wrote:
What's the rationale behind the division into C++ and Scheme? I don't
quite see why Lilypond uses C++ and Guile rather than using a serious
Scheme implementation (like PLT) and working to shift code from C++
over to Scheme.
The reason for having C++ is historical.
I'm not certain that using Scheme for everything will lower hackability
of the code, eg. I'm still not as fluent in Scheme as in C++ --with all
its shortcomings. Also, having opaque C++ objects is convenient,
because it makes it easy to enforce invariants and maintain encapsulation.
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen
LilyPond Software Design
-- Code for Music Notation
http://www.lilypond-design.com
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
