Re: [Gnu-arch-users] is there demand for itla?

[Tom Lord]

    > From: Doran <address@hidden>

    > One question though, would you see the itla syntax definitions
    > being used at any point in the tla source? There seems to be
    > commonality of purpose with tla's option-parsing code, but a
    > quick meditate in this direction just gets me thinking of big
    > fat grey fuzzy lines.

Same here.  Options range from autogenerating the tla option parsing
code to incrementally replacing tla (in itla) with a native
reimplementation as Scheme implementations improve.    But initially,
I would have no plan to change the tla option parsing code other than
to fix bugs/add options.


    > Oh, and I think building itla will make overarch emerge much
    > faster and in a more coherent fashion: it seems that (most)
    > people have been resistant to "take the first step" in creating
    > oarch due to the lack of a common framework to build on. A
    > repository of itla command definitions would be far more
    > attractive to browse and submit to than a repository of random
    > shell, ruby & python scripts each written in the contributor's
    > own style and with little or no code reuse ...

That's the theory, anyway :-)

-t