Re: (Meta) Guile and direction

[Eric Moore <moore at chem dot cmu dot edu>]

>>>>> "Lalo" == Lalo Martins <lalo@hackandroll.org> writes:

Lalo> Jim I don't think you understood my arguments at all.


Lalo> Because THERE ARE NO OVERALL PROJECT GOALS.

Seems to me that all the development that is being done is towards
making guile a general purpose extension/scripting language.  (but
still basically scheme).  The module system is needed to do this, it's
being worked on, goops will help support a wider variety of
programming styles, the re-working of SCM and the gh_ interface to be
less error-prone for extension programmers is towards this goal.
Performance improvements (genGC, the new FP stuff) all work towards
this goal.

And like all free software projects people are coding what
interests/is useful for them, some of which may not contribute
directly to that goal, but as far as "policy" decisions go, they all
seem compatible with that.

Lalo> - the generic extension/scripting interpreter and library that
Lalo> is described in the Guile homepage

Pretty much the only thing guile is advertised as doing that it
doesn't, or isn't an area of active development are the translators to
other languages, which seem to be a little behind the development
curve.  People periodically make attempts along these lines, but it
doesn't strike me as a major focus of current development...

Lalo> Please everyone, at least consider the vague possibility that I
Lalo> am right this time.

It's certainly possible that the goals aren't focussed enough for you, 
or what you want, but I'm not sure it calls for all-caps yelling.

Do you want more intermediate, rather than long-term goals?  Or do you
just want translators/syntax for non-lisp programmers.

  -Eric