Re: The dark corners of rep
- From: Ethan Grammatikidis <eekee57 fastmail fm>
- To: sawfish-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: The dark corners of rep
- Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 19:18:54 +0100
On Wed, 13 May 2009 06:24:23 +0200
Christopher Roy Bratusek <zanghar freenet de> wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 12.05.2009, 20:56 -0400 schrieb Eli Barzilay:
> > On May 12, Christopher Roy Bratusek wrote:
> > > Am Dienstag, den 12.05.2009, 13:58 +0900 schrieb Teika Kazura:
> > > > One more bad point is there: not for dev, but that users of
> > > > Sawfish have to learn Rep.
> > >
> > > ... if we switch they'll have to learn <xyz> instead of rep, that
> > > not a valid point against rep in favour of lisp/scheme.
> I meant the learning thing in general, and we were talking about users,
> not developers.
> ... of course there's not much to read about rep. But well librep is
> open for development, current version in trunk is 0.90, theoretically
> librep can be completely rewritten to be the best solution, if that is
> desired. But that seems not to be the case.
> (some) THINGS THAT THE REPLACEMENT FOR REP NEEDS TO HAVE:
> - who rewrites the whole(!) lisp part? (I don't have the time, currently
> fully rewriting a project of mine and don't want to do that again ^_^;)
> - replacement needs real gtk support (replacements with
> gtk-widget-abstraction like oo.o or ff will be rejected!)
> - replacement needs gtkbuilder support (we want the sawfish-themer back)
> - replacement needs gtk/gnome 3 support not too long after they have
> been released
stray thought: guile. It's scheme, was originally designed for gnome, and is maintained. However gtk support is not integral. Both guile-gtk and guild-gnome seem to be unmaintained, but both support gtk 2.x in their last editions. I have no idea of the quality of the gtk implementations in either, I'm just putting the guile idea out in case there's nothing better.
] [Thread Prev