Re: C++ vs. Scheme

[David Feuer]

On 4/4/06, Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> wrote:

> 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.

If I were writing LilyPond, from scratch, alone, I'd probably write it
in Standard ML.  Unfortunately, not a lot of hackers are familiar with
that.  As for opaqueness, that's certainly possible in Scheme, and
implementations like PLT provide lots of object-oriented kinds of
things if you're into that.  What I'd really like to see is more
functional (in the FP sense) management of Stencils.  set!s make me
nervous.

David Feuer