|
From: | Han-Wen Nienhuys |
Subject: | Re: C++ vs. Scheme |
Date: | Tue, 04 Apr 2006 20:46:31 +0200 |
User-agent: | Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20060313) |
David Feuer wrote:
What's the rationale behind the division into C++ and Scheme? I don't quite see why Lilypond uses C++ and Guile rather than using a serious Scheme implementation (like PLT) and working to shift code from C++ over to Scheme.
The reason for having C++ is historical.I'm not certain that using Scheme for everything will lower hackability of the code, eg. I'm still not as fluent in Scheme as in C++ --with all its shortcomings. Also, having opaque C++ objects is convenient, because it makes it easy to enforce invariants and maintain encapsulation.
-- Han-Wen Nienhuys - address@hidden - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen LilyPond Software Design -- Code for Music Notation http://www.lilypond-design.com
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |