Re: FVWM: Proposal on modules/languages

From: Jos\i Manuel Sousa Pereira <jmp_at_asterix.ist.utl.pt>
Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 03:26:41 +0100 (WEST)

"BM" == Brady Montz <bradym_at_cs.arizona.edu> writes:
>> What are the possible candidates??

  BM> Python, and guile too.

(big snip)

  BM> cons: - hasn't been the fastest language, although is is improving,
  BM> probably as fast as tcl now.

What! Has tcl improved so much recently? I have to give 8.0 a try...
;-)

More seriously:
I'd add
cons: the interpreter bloats fvwm considerably.

This applies to all other proposed interpreters. Tcl seems the least bad.
But there _are_ some lean implementations for some languages, such as Forth
(several), Scheme (Elk?), Slang?

It does not have to be _best_ language, just a good enough compromise between
features and size...
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.hpc.uh.edu/fvwm/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to majordomo_at_hpc.uh.edu.
To report problems, send mail to fvwm-owner_at_hpc.uh.edu.
Received on Tue May 05 1998 - 21:24:08 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Aug 29 2016 - 19:38:01 BST