From: Olivier Dion via General Guile related discussions <guile-user@gnu.org>
To: Neil Jerram <neiljerram@gmail.com>,
Blake Shaw <blake@nonconstructivism.com>
Cc: guix-user@gnu.org, guile-user <guile-user@gnu.org>, guix-days@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Proposal: Deep Dive into the Guile Docs & Makeover Proposal
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2022 10:33:12 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bkz27txj.fsf@laura> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKuG=vspPanMiS58WV+ibsNDVemcG-shk9eGp3O00WK6L8kLLQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, 19 Feb 2022, Neil Jerram <neiljerram@gmail.com> wrote:
> Personally, I am now a big fan of Scheme-centric + FFI, as it means
> always writing Scheme and never having to hack C code. If everyone
> agreed on that, we could discard all the C-centric parts of the
> manual, and focus the rest on a clearer use case. But I very much
> doubt that there is clear agreement on that. In particular, the
> C-centric usage is really Guile's original reason for existing: to act
> as a universal extension language for lots of GNU programs that
> already exist.
All projects being different, I don't think this is possible. For
example, I've added Guile bindings for Jami, which is written in C++.
FFI does not have support -- as far as I know -- for C++ std::string,
std::vector<T>, std::map<K, V>. So it's a necessary to use more than
the FFI module.
I should add that I first started using Guile because of its easy
integration with the C runtime and clear documentation on how to
interlop it. If it was not for that, I would probably have dismiss
Guile and select Lua instead.
TLDR: I don't think we should discard anything that is C-centric in the
manual.
--
Olivier Dion
Polymtl
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-19 15:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-17 16:58 Proposal: Deep Dive into the Guile Docs & Makeover Proposal Blake Shaw
2022-02-18 17:48 ` Olivier Dion via General Guile related discussions
2022-02-19 12:17 ` Neil Jerram
2022-02-19 15:33 ` Olivier Dion via General Guile related discussions [this message]
2022-02-19 17:35 ` adriano
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-02-18 18:05 Blake Shaw
2022-02-16 22:06 Blake Shaw
2022-02-08 16:59 Blake Shaw
2022-02-08 17:28 ` Daniel Tornabene
2022-02-08 15:21 Blake Shaw
2022-02-08 13:06 Blake Shaw
2022-02-08 7:36 Blake Shaw
2022-02-08 9:07 ` Neil Jerram
2022-02-08 11:46 ` Blake Shaw
2022-02-08 15:22 ` Daniel Tornabene
2022-02-08 10:16 ` Jérémy Korwin-Zmijowski
2022-02-08 14:45 ` james
2022-02-08 15:08 ` Olivier Dion via General Guile related discussions
2022-02-08 17:25 ` Daniel Tornabene
2022-02-10 17:20 ` Christine Lemmer-Webber
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87bkz27txj.fsf@laura \
--to=guile-user@gnu.org \
--cc=blake@nonconstructivism.com \
--cc=guix-days@gnu.org \
--cc=guix-user@gnu.org \
--cc=neiljerram@gmail.com \
--cc=olivier.dion@polymtl.ca \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).