[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Appreciation / Financial support
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: Appreciation / Financial support |
Date: |
Tue, 05 Jun 2012 09:53:50 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1.50 (gnu/linux) |
Joseph Rushton Wakeling <address@hidden> writes:
> On 05/06/12 06:10, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
>> As long as you seek out new technologies, you'll always get new
>> perspectives on programming.
>>
>> I, like most people, have only a limited amount of time. Learning a
>> programming language well enough to write code that sticks to wall
>> when you throw it, is a significant investment, and if there is a
>> choice, I'd invest in something that will pay off beyond working on
>> LilyPond. Scheme has very use in any context, so it's not very
>> attractive.
>
> The problem with Scheme is that while it's theoretically beautiful its
> paradigm and syntax are quite different from most current mainstream
> programming languages. That makes it a much harder language to ease
> into than most out there, and consequently harder to play around the
> edges of contributing or tweaking LilyPond.
>
> Some while back I remember playing around with a snippet containing a
> scheme function for controlling the rules of transposition. Even
> though I was only tweaking someone else's code it was very finnicky
> and difficult to get right.
I would doubt that this would have been the fault of Scheme. More
likely a problem of the Scheme/LilyPond interface choices, but those
choices don't go away when replacing Scheme.
> That almost certainly wouldn't have been the case if I'd been tweaking
> Java, Ruby or Python (all of which are programming languages I don't
> really _know_, but which are not difficult to ease into or to
> comprehend).
Python is a programming language where simple cut&paste of example code
fails unless you cut and paste whole lines since leading whitespace
matters. I don't call that exactly easy to comprehend.
Anyway, show the code. Take a snippet of LilyPond code, pretend that
LilyPond's extension language is Python, and show how it should look
like under that pretense.
> Regarding new languages, while I don't want to re-open the "alphabet
> soup" discussion, my suggestion wasn't simply a casual shout-out to a
> cool new language; it was a carefully-considered proposal based on
> concerns for programming power, ease and flexibility of syntax, code
> efficiency and suitability for the next generation of hardware.
Fewer buzzphrases, more substance.
--
David Kastrup
- Re: Appreciation / Financial support, (continued)
Re: Appreciation / Financial support, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2012/06/01
Re: Appreciation / Financial support, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2012/06/05
Re: Appreciation / Financial support, Joseph Rushton Wakeling, 2012/06/05
- Re: Appreciation / Financial support,
David Kastrup <=
- Scheme syntax vs. other languages [was: Re: Appreciation / Financial support], Joseph Rushton Wakeling, 2012/06/06
- Re: Scheme syntax vs. other languages [was: Re: Appreciation / Financial support], David Kastrup, 2012/06/07
- Re: Scheme syntax vs. other languages [was: Re: Appreciation / Financial support], David Kastrup, 2012/06/07
- Re: Scheme syntax vs. other languages [was: Re: Appreciation / Financial support], Joseph Rushton Wakeling, 2012/06/09
- Re: Scheme syntax vs. other languages [was: Re: Appreciation / Financial support], David Kastrup, 2012/06/10
- Re: Scheme syntax vs. other languages [was: Re: Appreciation / Financial support], Henning Hraban Ramm, 2012/06/10
- Re: Scheme syntax vs. other languages [was: Re: Appreciation / Financial support], David Kastrup, 2012/06/10
- Re: Scheme syntax vs. other languages [was: Re: Appreciation / Financial support], Henning Hraban Ramm, 2012/06/10
Re: Scheme syntax vs. other languages [was: Re: Appreciation / Financial support], Joseph Rushton Wakeling, 2012/06/10
Re: Scheme syntax vs. other languages [was: Re: Appreciation / Financial support], Tim McNamara, 2012/06/07