On 2 Jun 1999, Matt Armstrong wrote:

> Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
...
> As a prospective developer though, I'm not interested in dealing in
> the extra effort involved with the kinds of customizability you're
> talking about.  It makes the program harder to docuent, debug and test
> since the guts of it are opened up for everyone to touch and
> manipulate.  I am much more interested in working on a program without
> a scripting language.  Maybe this program is not GnuCash.

You have valid points.  OTOH, I am very unlikely to get involved in any
serious way with GnuCash development, as I simply don't have the time.
However, once it becomes something I can use at all (I can't get it to not
crash immediately), I might easily see some smallish feature that would be
useful to me.  If there is no extension language, I may submit a feature
request for one of the serious developers to implement.  If there is an
easily approachable extension language, such that I don't have to dig into
the guts, but can just get called as a hook, or whatever, I may well just
go ahead and implement the feature.  I feel confident saying this, because
I have at times done just this with emacs, and would not have been willing
to edit emacs's c source and recompile to do it.  

Of course, normal usage should not involve writing code, and GnuCash
should be highly useable without knowing the extension language, how to
compile anything, etc.  (I suspect that everyone agrees on this bit.)

> So those are my thoughts.  They are just the impressions of one guy,
> so I wouldn't put a lot of weight behind them.

They should have as much weight as mine--possibly more, as you label
yourself as a "prospective developer", while I do not.

-- 
Todd Greer      <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

----- %< -------------------------------------------- >% ------
The GnuCash / X-Accountant Mailing List
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
put "unsubscribe gnucash-devel [EMAIL PROTECTED]" in the body

Reply via email to