> Um, OK. This is above my head. Sounds like maybe Python and perl would be
> equally difficult in this case?
Sounds like the vim people managed to solve the linking of Python problem.
I'll try to check that out. If the stuff is good, I think might have a winner:
Amir is starting to agree, Lgb too, and others have listed Python as the first
choice as well.
The "only" serious problem is to decide whether Python should be mandatory
or optional. (We have to solve this problem for any scripting language
which can't be included in the distribution.)
The advantage of having a mandatory scripting language, that every LyX
binary supports, is that we can use the scripting language for implementing
fundamental features.
The disadvantage is the requirement of yet-another-library.
The potential for an optional scripting language is still large, and I
think this should probably be the way we go. For instance, one can imagine
a syntax highlighting feature in the LyXCode environment, and a "make"
command that extracted the code in these environments into a file and
compiled it. I.e. a literate programming extensions.
Also, there is an issue of whether we should aim for 1.0, or for 1.2.
Doing it for 1.0 would be relatively easy, so it would not postpone it
much, but on the other hand, it's not something we really need.
Also, there is a risk that the API we define for the scripting language
to access the internal document structure will change, and this would
break any scripts for 1.0 when it comes to 1.2.
> And the only
> comparable "scripting" that I've seen is the command language in xmgr (aka
> grace). It has a very simple syntax, so that the whole language can fit on
> one (long) html page in the docs.
Do you have a link?
> Unfortunately, Perl could never work like that. It seems to me that Python is
> also too complicated. Although I don't know python, it can obviously do a
> LOT. And any language that can do a lot automatically becomes non-trivial to
> learn.
> I think. Python may not require braces in an if statement, but I'm still not
> convinced that my mom would take the time to learn it.
Maybe it's prolonging the discussion without real reason, but I feel that
Python is not too complicated for the basic stuff.
Yes, Python is a full language where you can do complicated stuff, that is
difficult to understand for anybody. But the point is that easy stuff is
easy to do. I don't think this is the case in the same extend for Perl.
> But I could be wrong, in which case I guess I'll have to go download Python
> 1.5...
You should do that, or alternatively, go to "www.python.org" and read one of
their tutorials. I hope you will agree that Python has a simple syntax that is
relatively easy to learn.
And especially, it's easy to *read*. This also implies that it will be pretty
easy for your smart mom to modify autogenerated stuff from a future LyX macro
recording facility.
Greets,
Asger
