Re: Hello!

[Johannes Schindelin]

Hi,

On Mon, 10 Oct 2005, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:

> The entry point is main(). Good luck.

;-) I did that. It is funny to trace the execution path through 3 scheme 
functions (which could be streamlined, I guess) and back to C++.

> > Also, I just saw that one of the original developers is NOT really a fan of
> > C++; if you were to try again today, what language would you use and why?
> > I'm mostly familiar with C++ and Java (yeah, big diff there, I know), 
> 
> No, C++ and Java are much the same: statically typed imperative prrogramming
> languages, with support for object orientation.  I think I would use a new
> project to start learning Haskell or OCaml.

I´d vote for Haskell.

Having said that, I am quite comfortable with LilyPond as it is now. While 
there are quite a few language dependencies (C++, Scheme, Python, 
PostScript, TeX, and lex/yacc), I think that it runs quite well. Sure, one 
could try to do away with a few of them (for example, Python and TeX), but 
in the end it is not important which language it is written in, but how 
well. A good quality measure is: how easy is it to extend the thing 
without breaking old behaviour? As can be seen from LilyPond NEWS, 
LilyPond´s rating in that regard is very good indeed.

Ciao,
Dscho

P.S.: Of course, nobody prevents anybody from rewriting LilyPond in Visual 
Basic as master´s thesis...