Updated Guile Tutorial

[Neil Jerram]

Hi all,

I know that by know Daniel has updated the tutorial (and I'll comment
on that later), but there are a few points below that I should respond
to.

Linas Vepstas <address@hidden> writes:

> 2009/8/2 Daniel Kraft <address@hidden>:
>>
>> I also got started using Guile with that turtle package tutorial, and it was
>> really quite nice for the purpose...  But I also later rewrote my original
>> code to not use gh_ after I discovered there was a new API ;)
>>
>> This document is linked here:
>> http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/docs/guile-tut/tutorial.html
>>
>> So it seems to be part of the "official documentation" somewhat...
>
> Well, its on the main gnu.org website, so it doesn't get much
> more official than that.

It was believed to be useful at the time that David contributed it,
and so one of us (I can't remember who) added it to the website.

I believe it's still useful - and especially so now that Daniel has
updated the APIs.

>> However,
>> it does not seem to be the stuff in doc/tutorial (actually, grepping doc for
>> tortoise does not give any hits at all?)

No.  It's only on the website at the moment, not in Git or Guile
releases.  A bit weird, I accept, but not a big problem.

>>  -- so does anyone know who wrote it
>> and where/what it is meant to be?
>
> I don't get what you are saying ...
> at the bottom of your URL it says clearly:
>  "I wrote this page because ... etc
> Copyright (c) 2000 David Drysdale
> Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify ...
> GNU Free Documentation License,

FWIW, David is a colleague of mine at work.

>> If that's no problem with the original author, I'd volunteer to rework the
>> tutorial for the new Guile API.
>
> Well, with the GFDL, you don't have to contact the original author.
> You can hack away at it as desired.

Indeed.  In any case, I am sure that David would have no problem with
reworking.

>> Or maybe write some other tutorial in the
>> same style just with another example (that maybe does not use X functions
>> but something more basic).
>
> Yeah, X examples are rather anachronistic.  I dunno, an OpenGL
> version might be fun.  Imagine .. 3D programming in scheme ..!
> it would not be a bad idea, I don't think.
>
> Anyway, doing something interactive would be appropriate --
> something vaguely enjoyable when its done.  Maybe a simple
> fractal explorer?

Personally I'm really happy that you've updated the existing tutorial;
because on the one hand it was a good tutorial, and on the other its
use of GH was definitely confusing people.  Of course, if you'd now
like to extend it by adding examples of other kinds of programming,
that would be great.

Regards,
        Neil