gEDA-dev: My £0.02 worth
Dan McMahill
dan at mcmahill.net
Mon Jun 4 19:25:19 EDT 2007
Peter TB Brett wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> There is a debate about moving gEDA to using some scripting language other
> than Guile Scheme for extensibility. I oppose this.
>
> - Scheme has unambiguous syntax
> - Scheme is easy to debug
> - Guile is fast
> - Guile is under the same license as gEDA
> - Adding new Guile functions in C code is really easy.
and despite my grumbling, guile works on more systems than some of the
other scheme implementations I've seen. I'm probably a bit of an
oddball in that I think SICP is a wonderful book and I like scheme for
EDA stuff.
> The current complaints seem to be about the fact that the 1.6 stable and 1.8
> stable branches of Guile are different. This seems to come as a surprise,
> even considering the fact that there are THREE YEARS of development between
> them.
mostly I'm grumbling because I'm having to take a few days off of
thinking about geda work to port guile to the two platforms I use.
1.8.1 certainly is not building cleanly for me on non linux/i386 systems
right now. I'd be curious to know how it works for someone on a 64-bit
linux and also something like darwin.
btw, anyone know how to run the guile testsuite from within gdb so I can
figure out why it segfaults on some tests?
-Dan
More information about the geda-dev
mailing list