From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: rixed@happyleptic.org Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Trying guile as an extention language for a 'real world' product Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2010 07:36:51 +0200 Message-ID: <20100703053651.GA13073@yeeloong> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1278135499 13207 80.91.229.12 (3 Jul 2010 05:38:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2010 05:38:19 +0000 (UTC) To: guile-user Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jul 03 07:38:18 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-user@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OUvQf-0004TF-2p for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Sat, 03 Jul 2010 07:38:17 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44219 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OUvQe-00037f-B4 for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Sat, 03 Jul 2010 01:38:16 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=35035 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OUvQV-00036A-RZ for guile-user@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Jul 2010 01:38:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OUvQU-0007gx-Qu for guile-user@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Jul 2010 01:38:07 -0400 Original-Received: from smtp5-g21.free.fr ([212.27.42.5]:38374) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OUvQU-0007eN-6v for guile-user@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Jul 2010 01:38:06 -0400 Original-Received: from apc.happyleptic.org (unknown [82.67.194.89]) by smtp5-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 363A4D4807D for ; Sat, 3 Jul 2010 07:37:39 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from yeeloong (unknown [192.168.1.40]) by apc.happyleptic.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8608233874 for ; Sat, 3 Jan 1970 12:34:45 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: by yeeloong (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 03 Jul 2010 07:36:51 +0200 Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:7948 Archived-At: Hi list ! At work, I recently pushed the idea to use an extention language for our main product, which is a middle sized program written in C with many threads, that must run quickly without without interruption 24/7, and that have little memory nor CPU to spare. As nobody comes with a better idea, and as I'm secretly in love with scheme and aligned to the GNU world domination plans, this extention language is going to be guile. The first usage for this extention language would be to replace the various configuration system with a simpler and more powerfull interface from scheme to C configuration datas. But I just came across Andy's slides for ghm 2009, where he says that guile is "not so much for config files (days of fvwmrc long gone)". What does he mean by that ? Are there any contraindication against using guile as an extention language for configuration ? And thanx for all the hacks !