Re: Appreciation / Financial support

[address@hidden]

On 30 mai 2012, at 03:12, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:

> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 6:04 PM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> writes:
>>>> While the scheme integration have been a big leap forward in terms of
>>>> expandability and flexibility, I think it has also been our gravest
>>>> design error. Both for technical reasons (GUILE is a poor
>>>> implementation), but also for practical reasons: writing scheme is
>>>> hard for the general public, and it has surely decreased the amount of
>>>> developer participation we've had.
>> 
>> Interesting.  If you were deciding now, what language would you use?
>> 
>> And is it at all conceivable to change this now?
> 
> 
> I personally have become very enamored with Go (golang.org), btw.
> Sometimes I wonder how LilyPond would turn out if I started it from
> scratch today.
> 

Many projects release X.0 version w/ entirely new parts of the code base.  It 
is a huge leap, but in my mind thinking big like this is a good idea.  I think 
that it is important to max out the present version and figure out where its 
faults lie and then decide if rewriting LilyPond makes sense.  I think it could 
be done in 3 months divided over 4-5 people (meaning anything in C++/Scheme - I 
wouldn't touch the MetaFont).

That said, people have been writing rather critical things of Scheme.  I'll 
just say that I <3 Scheme!

Cheers,
MS