We hear and respect your opinion. Java is definitely too slow still to
be used for most client-side work, it's piggy with RAM, and the JITs are
still buggy.
Where speed is not the primary concern, Java has a lot going for it,
IMHO. Turn off the JIT and it's pretty stable these days.
One of Gn
I'll say this only once, very quietly, since I don't want a flame
war; but personally I've never been a fan of Java. Its slowww, buggy,
crashes a lot, and has trouble playing nice with others.
I've always been intrigued by the fact that the (vast?) majority
of the open source community have stay
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> A view of the history and consideration of some practical matters may
> shed some light.
It did, thanks.
> -- Even if all the gnucash scheme coders died tommorrow, there's
> so much scheme code that it would be a massive undertaking to
> re-write it.
>
> --
Hi Dan,
A view of the history and consideration of some practical matters may
shed some light.
Historically (about 3 years ago), the idea of scripting for gnucash was
discussed at length. I personally was advocating perl, not because
it was better, or that I liked it more, but because I knew t
On Wed, 17 Jan 2001 22:48:53 EST, the world broke into rejoicing as
David Merrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 10:44:02PM -0600, Christopher Browne wrote:
> > On Tue, 16 Jan 2001 10:00:05 CST, the world broke into rejoicing as
> > The world "could use" something akin to Gra
On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 10:44:02PM -0600, Christopher Browne wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jan 2001 10:00:05 CST, the world broke into rejoicing as
> The world "could use" something akin to Graham's "On Lisp" that was,
> instead, "On Scheme." Kent Dybvig's book on ANSI Scheme, which also
> happens to be av
On Tue, 16 Jan 2001 10:00:05 CST, the world broke into rejoicing as
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Gribble) said:
> On Mon, Jan 15, 2001 at 07:05:40PM -0500, Eugene Tyurin wrote:
> > Many years ago (circa 1988) I remember briefly trying out some
> > package called Texas Instruments' Scheme. Bac
I are stoopid. James, my apologies for the duplicate email.
rob
- Forwarded message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 18:27:21 -0700 (MST)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: scripting language vs. developer community size
To: James LewisMoss
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Gribble) writes:
> The basic data structure in Scheme (and all LISP-like languages... in
> fact LISP is an acronym for LIst PRocessing) is the singly-linked
> list. The backbone of the list is a chain of cells ("cons cells")
> that have a pointer to the cell data and a "n
On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 09:09:51AM -0700, Clark Jones wrote:
> Just in case anyone's not aware of it, the "CAR" and "CDR" in Lisp (I'm
> not familiar with Scheme) are register names for a computer designed in
> the late 1950's. (Please don't ask me what the acronyms stand for, or
> what the compu
Tyson Dowd wrote:
>
> On 15-Jan-2001, Dan Kegel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> > Now I'm reading about car, cdr, caar, cddr, cadr, cdar, and the like.
> > How nice that all the keywords of the language are so intuitive and high-level,
> > uninfluenced by the hardware the language originally r
Dan Kegel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> p.s. I hope to use GnuCash soon myself, and am quite happy that the
> latest RPM's install without trouble on Red Hat 6.2. And I'm trying
> to learn Scheme, so if I run into a feature I've gotta have, I can
> add it...
If you need any help with scheme, fe
Dan Kegel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> By the way, I went and bought a Scheme book today at my favorite
> technical bookstore (Op-Amp Books in Los Angeles). I asked the
> clerk where the Scheme books were and he sniggered... there was an
> entire wall of C++ books, and just four books about Sch
On Mon, Jan 15, 2001 at 07:05:40PM -0500, Eugene Tyurin wrote:
> Many years ago (circa 1988) I remember briefly trying out some
> package called Texas Instruments' Scheme. Back then I thought it
> looked like a dialect of Lisp with some additional system and GUI
> toolkits.
>
> Is th
Christopher Browne wrote:
> Frankly, it's utterly unimportant if there are thousands of people out
> there in "Internet-Land" that think Scheme is a ludicrous choice if, in
> contrast, the core developers of GnuCash _all_ happen to like Scheme.
> If the latter fact is true [and if not directly tru
On Mon, 15 Jan 2001 20:09:10 EST, the world broke into rejoicing as
Ariel Rios <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > I think this is a little bit disingenuous. Nobody outside the
> > gnucash-devel list is requiring gnucash to use Scheme, least of all
> > RMS; in point of fact, hardly any GNU projects ac
On 15-Jan-2001, Dan Kegel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> By the way, I went and bought a Scheme book today at my favorite technical
> bookstore (Op-Amp Books in Los Angeles). I asked the clerk where the Scheme
> books were and he sniggered... there was an entire wall of C++ books,
> and just four b
Dan Kegel wrote:
> Now I'm reading about car, cdr, caar, cddr, cadr, cdar, and the like.
> How nice that all the keywords of the language are so intuitive and high-level,
> uninfluenced by the hardware the language originally ran on.
Forgot the URL for the origin story of those keywords. It's
ht
Ariel Rios wrote:
>
> > I think this is a little bit disingenuous. Nobody outside the
> > gnucash-devel list is requiring gnucash to use Scheme, least of all
> > RMS; in point of fact, hardly any GNU projects actually use Scheme
> > anyway, despite several years of drum-beating to get it to happ
> I think this is a little bit disingenuous. Nobody outside the
> gnucash-devel list is requiring gnucash to use Scheme, least of all
> RMS; in point of fact, hardly any GNU projects actually use Scheme
> anyway, despite several years of drum-beating to get it to happen.
False. Many GNOME applica
Eugene Tyurin wrote:
>
> Many years ago (circa 1988) I remember briefly trying out some
> package called Texas Instruments' Scheme. Back then I thought it
> looked like a dialect of Lisp with some additional system and GUI
> toolkits.
>
> Is that "The Scheme" we're talking about?
S
Many years ago (circa 1988) I remember briefly trying out some
package called Texas Instruments' Scheme. Back then I thought it
looked like a dialect of Lisp with some additional system and GUI
toolkits.
Is that "The Scheme" we're talking about?
--
Nothing here - come back later!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Gribble) writes:
> I've written big programs in C, C++, Common LISP, and Scheme, and
> small programs in lots and lots of languages. For working on big
> programs, right at this time I can't think of any way I'd rather do
> it than as a combination of Scheme and C. Schem
"Dirk-Jan C . Binnema" writes:
> On Tue Jan 16, 2001 at 05:51:31PM +1100, Robert Graham Merkel wrote:
> > Ariel Rios writes:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, 14 Jan 2001, Dan Kegel wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm sure this has been discussed a zillion times but I'd like to bring
> it up again:
> > > >
On Tue Jan 16, 2001 at 05:51:31PM +1100, Robert Graham Merkel wrote:
> Ariel Rios writes:
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 14 Jan 2001, Dan Kegel wrote:
> >
> > > I'm sure this has been discussed a zillion times but I'd like to bring it up
>again:
> > >
> > > Requiring that all high-level Gnucash c
On Mon, Jan 15, 2001 at 06:37:59PM +, Al Snell wrote:
> > On the other hand, perhaps you folks are using "ability to program
> > Scheme" in the same way Linus is using "ability to debug kernel
> > problems without a kernel debugger", i.e. as an IQ filter to keep
> > dumb people from contributi
Al Snell wrote:
>
> On Mon, 15 Jan 2001, Dan Kegel wrote:
> > On the other hand, perhaps you folks are using "ability to program Scheme"
> > in the same way Linus is using "ability to debug kernel problems without
> > a kernel debugger", i.e. as an IQ filter to keep dumb people from contributing
On Mon, 15 Jan 2001, Dan Kegel wrote:
> On the other hand, perhaps you folks are using "ability to program Scheme"
> in the same way Linus is using "ability to debug kernel problems without
> a kernel debugger", i.e. as an IQ filter to keep dumb people from contributing
> code. I respect that st
James LewisMoss wrote:
> >> > Requiring that all high-level Gnucash code be in Scheme might be
> >> > restricting the number of developers able to contribute to it.
> >> Why?
>
> Dan> Because there are very few people who know how to program in
> Dan> Scheme compared to the number of people
Ariel Rios wrote:
>
> > Because there are very few people who know how to program in Scheme
> > compared to the number of people who know how to program in C, C++, Java, or Perl.
> Basically your argument is: "Scheme is bad for there are not many
> programmers".
Nope, not saying Scheme is bad.
Ariel Rios writes:
>
>
> On Sun, 14 Jan 2001, Dan Kegel wrote:
>
> > I'm sure this has been discussed a zillion times but I'd like to bring it up again:
> >
> > Requiring that all high-level Gnucash code be in Scheme might be
> > restricting the number of developers able to contribute
> On Sun, 14 Jan 2001 22:06:08 -0800, Dan Kegel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Dan> Ariel Rios wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 14 Jan 2001, Dan Kegel wrote:
>>
>> > I'm sure this has been discussed a zillion times but I'd like to
>> > bring it up again:
>> >
>> > Requiring that all high-level Gnucash
> Because there are very few people who know how to program in Scheme
> compared to the number of people who know how to program in C, C++, Java, or Perl.
Basically your argument is: "Scheme is bad for there are not many
programmers". However you forget that Scheme is easier than C,
C++, Java, Pe
Ariel Rios wrote:
>
> On Sun, 14 Jan 2001, Dan Kegel wrote:
>
> > I'm sure this has been discussed a zillion times but I'd like to bring it up again:
> >
> > Requiring that all high-level Gnucash code be in Scheme might be
> > restricting the number of developers able to contribute to it.
> Why?
On Sun, 14 Jan 2001, Dan Kegel wrote:
> I'm sure this has been discussed a zillion times but I'd like to bring it up again:
>
> Requiring that all high-level Gnucash code be in Scheme might be
> restricting the number of developers able to contribute to it.
Why?
> Here's a few quotes from th
I'm sure this has been discussed a zillion times but I'd like to bring it up again:
Requiring that all high-level Gnucash code be in Scheme might be
restricting the number of developers able to contribute to it.
Here's a few quotes from the web in support of that theory
(found by searching for
36 matches
Mail list logo
