From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rob Browning Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Roadmap and goals? Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 10:14:58 -0500 Sender: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <87sn5pqe19.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> References: <3CBD68DB.2CC96A4F@staff.ttu.ee> <87sn5sxevl.fsf@ortler.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1019402315 28703 127.0.0.1 (21 Apr 2002 15:18:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 15:18:35 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Tanel Tammet , guile-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16zJ6p-0007Sq-00 for ; Sun, 21 Apr 2002 17:18:35 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16zJ6M-0000Gh-00; Sun, 21 Apr 2002 11:18:06 -0400 Original-Received: from dsl-209-87-109-2.constant.com ([209.87.109.2] helo=defaultvalue.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16zJ3P-0008I4-00 for ; Sun, 21 Apr 2002 11:15:03 -0400 Original-Received: from raven.i.defaultvalue.org (raven.i.defaultvalue.org [192.168.1.7]) by defaultvalue.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4ADC44C6; Sun, 21 Apr 2002 10:15:01 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: by raven.i.defaultvalue.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 31899BB0; Sun, 21 Apr 2002 10:14:59 -0500 (CDT) Original-To: Nicolas Neuss In-Reply-To: <87sn5sxevl.fsf@ortler.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de> (Nicolas Neuss's message of "19 Apr 2002 10:38:06 +0200") Original-Lines: 67 User-Agent: Gnus/5.090006 (Oort Gnus v0.06) Emacs/21.2 (i386-debian-linux-gnu) Errors-To: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:433 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:433 (including guile-user since a copy was posted there too) Nicolas Neuss writes: > Unfortunately, all those goals are very questionable. First, non-lisp > languages get more and more of Lisp's capabilities[1] and the > advantage is not large any more, especially for the spartanic Scheme > branch. Even if that were true, to me that's a little like saying that there's no reason Perl programmers shouldn't switch to Python, or Tcl to Perl, or ... since they can do roughly the same things (presuming the languages in question can do mostly the same things). > Second, my guess is that most applications are written within one > language, because maintaining the interface between two languages is > a problem. Could be, and it deppends on what you mean bu "written within" but to me the Gimp, Guppi, Gnucash, Emacs, snd, and Gnumeric are notable counter-examples. > Third, replacing Elisp with Common Lisp would probably be both > easier and better (but is still difficult, see below). I haven't checked, but I'd be a little concerned about size. Last CL implementation I looked at in much detail was quite large, but perhaps that's not true anymore. > Fourth, more liberal licenses than the GPL (e.g. some BSD license) > or GPLed software not maintained by the FSF is also a nice thing[2]. Not sure if you know, but Guile's license has changed, it's no longer covered under the GPL alone, there's an exception clause that allows it to be linked against other applications without causing them to automatically be covered under the GPL. See the Guile copyright for the precise terms. > Fifth, emulating languages in an integrating way is easy to say, but > difficult to work out (this is proved by Guile not emulating one > single other language in a reasonable way). I consider this an open question -- guile may or may not ever end up emulating a large number of languages other than elisp, but after the recent work, I do have reasonable hope for elisp. , we'll see. > [2] It seems that while the GNU system being under the GPL is > certainly achievable, it does not really work that the FSF is the > copyright hodler of all essential parts. This goal should be > abandoned. I can't speak for RMS, but based on my experience, this is a non-starter, and now that I understand the issues and have seen the US legal system in action, I can understand the reasoning. > [4] IMHO, it is a terrible nonsense that people work on so many Scheme > implementations in parallel, only to feed the egos of their > respective leaders. You and me both -- what other possible reason could people have for working on anything but Guile? ;> -- Rob Browning rlb @defaultvalue.org, @linuxdevel.com, and @debian.org Previously @cs.utexas.edu GPG=1C58 8B2C FB5E 3F64 EA5C 64AE 78FE E5FE F0CB A0AD _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel