Re: why use guile?

[Anthony Martin <amartin engr csulb edu>]

On Mon, 9 Feb 1998, Peter Norton wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 09, 1998 at 08:52:21AM -0800, Anthony Martin wrote:
> > Such as scheme, Python, Perl, Tcl, C, C++?  Obviously CORBA isn't a
> > scripting language, but it is the common "language" that all other
> > languages can speak.  For example:
> 
> Well, let's look at this from a practical standpoint.  We don't have an
> ORB that's accessible to the lion's share of the languages out there.  So
> it's imperative to chose some way to do this within the constraints of
> what we've got.  Maybe using guile directly will be a quaint "feature"
> that we want to get rid of 2 or 3 years from now, but currently it's the
> only way.

OK, that answer actually makes some sense.  Basically CORBA is the
ultimate, general solution, but we don't have the tools to make
practical use of it yet.  Guile works today, so we will use it until it is
practical to use CORBA.  However, there are a couple of potential problems
with doing it this way:

1.  Developers have to write bindings for guile _and_ CORBA, instead of
just CORBA.
2.  There will be guile bindings that aren't available through CORBA, or
the other way around.

Anyway, thanks for the response.  I guess I understand the justification
for the apparent duplication of effort. 

Tony.