Re: why doesn't gimp use guile?

[Christopher Cramer]

On Thu, Feb 14, 2002 at 09:13:56PM -0500, Alejandro Forero Cuervo wrote:
> I guess this is some kind of  vicious circle (do you use that expression
> in  english?    I'm  translating   literally  from   spanish's  "circulo
> vicioso")

I believe the expression "vicious cycle" is more common in English, but
"vicious circle" is perfectly clear.

> For instance, there  is a current discusion in Ion's  mailing list about
> adding support  for a real extension  language.  Some people are  in for
> Perl while  others scream Guile.   Perl, unfortunately, is  available on
> more  platforms so  they might  end  implementing things  in Perl  (even
> though, in my humble opinion, Guile's  API for calling Scheme from C and
> C from Scheme is MUCH more sane than Perl's braindead XS system).

By "is available on more platforms" do you mean it comes installed on
more platforms or it actually compiles and runs on more platforms? The
former is obviously going to be true for a long time to come, but the
latter could be easily fixed.

> In my opinion, one thing that could bring up the number of machines with
> Guile  installed  is selling  it  to  the public  as  The  Gnome way  to
> configure  software.  This  way it  could be  seen as  a standard  Gnome
> component and get installed wherever Gnome is.  Gnome is currently using
> libXml for most of its applications' config files.  LibXML is fine and I
> think its  maintainer does a very  good job but  I can't get my  self to
> like all that JibbaJabba about XML...

There's a quote from Henry Spencer that goes, "Those who do not understand
Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly." I guess the same is true
of Lisp. Although, I would've expected many people who chose to use XML
would've known better.

-- 
Christopher Cramer <address@hidden> <http://www.pyro.net/~crayc/>
Quoi que vous fassiez, écrasez l'infâme, et aimez qui vous aime.
        -- Voltaire