2013/6/11 Urs Liska <[email protected]>: > Am 11.06.2013 15:11, schrieb Janek Warchoł: >> >> 2013/6/11 Urs Liska <[email protected]>: >> >> Don't feel dumb - i don't know how to get along with scheme either ;) >> (yet) > > > After all, I'm still wondering what benefits Scheme offers. > I find it extremely reluctant to be understood (that's what it feels: Scheme > tries to avoid being understood), and I would like to have some benefits > that outweigh that effort. And so far I can't see them. > > [This is a question for the conaisseurs out there] > > Urs > > >> >> JAnek
Well, I can't compare scheme with other programming-languages. I'm a musician not a programmer. Trying to dive into LilyPond deeper (to achieve the functionality for my own scores that fits best my needs) I decided to learn scheme. Read some manuals, made some exercises etc. It's not easy to learn any language, though I didn't expect it would be easy. :) So far scheme is the one and only I tried to learn. Best I can say about scheme (David already mentioned it) is that you can _use_ it: Write #(define xyz 10) in a *.ly-file and do: #(write xyz) And it works, Once I did a first step into C++ The common "hello world" I had to _compile_ it to make it work. That makes a great difference for usability in LilyPond. So far I had no big problems to learn scheme. (Ok, I remember I was _very_ happy when I programmed my first successful recursion, my second, my third, ... Nowadays I don't count them any more :) ) Though, I wasn't hampered by expectations from other languages learned before. I really don't know, though, might this be a problem? Cheers, Harm _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
