Re : [Chicken-users] other leading Schemes

[minh thu]

2007/2/2, Brandon J. Van Every <address@hidden>:
> minh thu wrote:
> > Hi Brandon,
> >
> > although you first start your mail with a question, what's the
> > underlying intention ?
> > I can't understand why there's so much discussion about 'community
> > size' and 'growing' and  so on... it's the same on every mailing list
> > I've read.
> >
> > Don't take my question offensively; it's really not the goal...
> >
>
> The underlying intention is for programming "not to suck."

> That and to
> actually make money.  Programming pretty much sucks when it creates lots
> of busywork for you + doesn't pay the bills.  You get caught in a cycle
> of working on unprofitable trivia, suddenly wondering how you'll keep
> the roof over your head, and realizing the gruntwork has kept you from
> accomplishing any significant goal anyways.  When this goes on for a
> long time, you come to realize that the language you're using is not
> better than any other crap out there, no matter how sophisticated or
> advantageous it's supposed to be.  It's actually a big waste of time.
> You just waste your time in different ways than a mainstream language.

You're saying programming sucks when 1/ you want it to make money but
got stuck in silly details, 2/ and also the language used is of minor
importance.

1/ There's different way to make money with programming but to get
stuck in silly details, I would think you're talking of some kind of
personal project. Right ?

Because I would think also that for ordered tasks, it's perfectly
acceptable to use any language to get the job done.

2/ Language used is of minor importance : why ? Because java is bulky
but has a lot of libraries, and because Scheme is slick but with not
enough tools ?

Or because even if Scheme is nicer than java you have gruntworks that
you woudn't have with java ? In fact, I thought a nicer language would
make the work (even groundwork) more pleasant and faster do.

> At least with the mainstream languages, there's money in them, you can
> get paid for them.  If you accidentally become well versed in the trivia
> of C++, Java, or C#, you can make big $$$$$$ at that.

Do you mean being employed ? Or at least working for out sourced
project, not in-house project (i.e. the language used is of importance
for the one who ordered the project) ?

> With a marginal language like Scheme, nobody cares.  You go hungry.

Same question.

> I'm not ready to give up on Chicken yet, or open source in general.  I
> think there must be a profitable business model in it somewhere.  But
> I'm quite aware of all the support and R&D jobs that must get done, to
> make a language that really is pleasant to use.  So I see community
> organization as key.

You mean the language is not useable as-is...

> Academics and students don't feel these issues.  They've got financial
> support for their work.  So they can work on languages like Scheme that
> don't make most people any money.

... but is ok for non-making-money work. right ?

> Some people actually use Scheme as part of their commercial business
> model.  But they are few and far between.  Their economic results are
> not easily reproduced by most people.  Whereas anyone can learn C++,
> Java, and C# and then go make money.

I have difficulties to explain my misunderstanding of what you're
saying. I have the feeling you're mixing different issues : languages
(mainstream and others) and business models.

I think you're saying "at least, with java, you can be still ok making
money" but forget that it would imply a totally different way of
making so than when you're saying "even with Scheme, groudwork gets
you stucked".

Hoping it makes sense,
cheers,
thu