From: Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>
To: "Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org>
Cc: guix-devel <guix-devel@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Switching to ECMAscript
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 16:07:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140401140750.GA4471@debian> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87k3b9l6xs.fsf@gnu.org>
Hello,
this is quite outrageous, and if you decide to follow this road, I am certain
to quit the project, and maybe even fork it.
I agree that the choice of using Scheme/Guile was maybe made in a hurry and
prematurely. Scheme dialects seem to follow the paradigm "one language, one
programmer" - at the Chaos Communication Congress, I did not meet two people
at the Lisp table programming in the same dialect! With our number of contri-
butors, we have already quite transgressed on this rule. Also, the functional
paradigm is a bit dated. Admittedly, we have package "objects", inheriting
from others, but this feels a bit like an add-on to modernise the language.
However, there are much more reasonable choices than Ecmascript, with its
quirky object model, and whose functional features imply that maybe we would
not completely get rid of the past. Personally, I think we should switch to
Python.
Among my teaching colleagues, this is now the language of choice - just about
everybody uses it! So I think that on the way to world domination, which we
should strive for, this will give us lots of opportunity (and set a positive
precedent in the GNU project, which could also use such a modernising boost).
Personally, getting a grasp on Python would be very helpful for me and serve
as an introduction to Sage, the major free mathematics software regrouping
more or less all such free software under one umbrella.
Python is a modern programming language, and I think that also from an equal
opportunity point of view it would be a good choice: While Lisp is a left-
over from a time where computer science was essentially at the reach of
white males in the developed world, a switch could be seen as a step towards
a more inclusive environment (notice, for instance, that the OLPC Sugar
environment is written in Python).
It is unfortunate that also Nix prepares a switch to Ecmascript; while
I consider it a positive sign that they envision an alternative language,
maybe there is still the possibility of convincing them of the merits of
Python; we might even join forces and form one community.
What do you think?
Andreas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-01 14:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-01 9:45 Switching to ECMAscript Ludovic Courtès
2014-04-01 10:02 ` Alex Sassmannshausen
2014-04-01 13:21 ` Ludovic Courtès
2014-04-01 14:07 ` Andreas Enge [this message]
2014-04-01 16:17 ` Ludovic Courtès
2014-04-01 18:48 ` Thompson, David
2014-04-01 15:16 ` Felipe López
2014-04-02 13:12 ` Ludovic Courtès
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://guix.gnu.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140401140750.GA4471@debian \
--to=andreas@enge.fr \
--cc=guix-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=ludo@gnu.org \
/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.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
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).