Re: Appreciation / Financial support

[David Kastrup]

Nils <address@hidden> writes:

> On Tue, 29 May 2012 19:08:51 +0200
> Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 6:04 PM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>> > Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> writes:
>> >> While the scheme integration have been a big leap forward in terms of
>> >> expandability and flexibility, I think it has also been our gravest
>> >> design error. Both for technical reasons (GUILE is a poor
>> >> implementation), but also for practical reasons: writing scheme is
>> >> hard for the general public, and it has surely decreased the amount of
>> >> developer participation we've had.
>> 
>> Interesting.  If you were deciding now, what language would you use?
>> 
>> And is it at all conceivable to change this now?
>> 
>> cheers,
>> Janek
>
> My 2 cents:
> If it is really a core extension: Python.

I consider Python fabulously ill-suited as an extension language.

a) monstrous footprint in syntax and memory
b) indentation-based syntax

For an extension language, it is important to be able to bounce language
fragments around.  A language that changes meaning with indentation is
not really well-behaved in that respect.

> For everything that does not need performance my language of
> choice. Development in such a high level language really speeds things
> up.  Since Lilypond does not need performance in any step,

Muahahahahahaha.  "make doc" 1h20 on a dual processor system.

> if starting from zero, I would write Lilypond completely in Python.
>
> If it is for easy user scripting: Lua. Flexible, easy to learn,
> especially designed for that purpose.

Yup.  And fast.  And easily mappable to a different language like
LilyPond.  String or symbol?  Not a choice you need to make, there are
only interned strings.  List, array, hashtable, records?  Not a choice
you need to make, there are only tables.  And so on.

> Both have in common that there is a big user base,

Lua does not have such a large user base.  More like a fan base.
Python, in contrast, is solidly mainstream.

-- 
David Kastrup