Re: [gtk-list] Re: Glade - UI Builder

[hawtin <hawtin helios usq edu au>]

>> maybe this is an unneeded personal opinion, but as easy as lisp is to
>> parse by a program.. it's twice as repulsive to a human. how about
>> something extremely simple, like BASIC. it would take little code for the
>> Glade to parse, and assuming one widget per line, it would be fairly
>> simple for anyone with a text editor to modify.

BASIC doesn't have the depth to be able to express what you what to 
transfer anyway.
Its just TOO simple ;(

If you want a simple, repulsive, language, try forth ! ;)

>I haven't looked at the program, or know the languages that well...
>But, if it is going to need to be edited by human hands,...it shouldn't be 
>lisp,

The point is that it dowsn't need to be edited by human hands.
The UI Builder builds it, the intereter reads it, ... right ?
Humans only need to tinker with it in the development stage.

>unless you want only people who know lisp to be able to use it...lisp is 
>not as
>intuitive to read as the html like code you had.
>But, if there are going to be interpreters that parse and return language
>code....it should be more machine, and less human, readable.

case in point ... lisp (scheme ?)

>I personally think such a thing would be more useable if there were 
>interpreters.
>If I am going to have to translate anyway...I would probably just write it 
>out in code to start with.

my 2 bits worth,

Kim