[plt-scheme] Re: Visual Studio .NET ...easier than PLT Scheme

From: Guenther Schmidt (gue.schmidt at web.de)
Date: Fri Jan 30 15:34:17 EST 2004

Dear Matthias,

I certainly started something again here :-)

Well you asked about a wish list.

1. I'd think I'd be a good idea to start a web page for a more fundamental discussion such as this. Mailinglist will do though.

2. It's isn't realy only about a Visual UI for UI design, it's also about a richer widget set, that would be nice.

3. Debugging and breakpoints would also be nice.

4. DrScheme isn't realy for "Dummies" and yes *I* am one.

5. Not *having* to build everything from scratch, but having a rich, semi-standadarized framework would also help. I do know that a framework does exist for PLT Scheme, but keep the for "Dummies" in mind here.

Scheme apparently does give everyone the possibility to tailor the language to suit ones needs. That's wonderful, but that comes with a problem, you need the skill to do it.

6. Adding more editing features would also very nice.

7. ........


Dear members of the PLT project, you are all doing a wonderful job and what I appreciate even more is your readiness to care about us.

There is one "blasphemic" suggestion I'd like to make though. When it comes to making suggestions I am harldy the right person to ask Matthias. Would it be so unwise to suggest to see if Miguel de Icaza would be interested to give his views on DrScheme? At the end of the day he *does* have experience on providing and designing tools for programmers.

Best regards

Guenther, a dummy schemer

Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>  http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme
> I would hope that we can build abstractions that overcome these 
> shortcomings. That's our business
> -- Matthias
> On Jan 30, 2004, at 12:26 PM, Chris Perkins wrote:
>>   For list-related administrative tasks:
>>   http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme
>> At 05:42 AM 1/30/2004, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>>> This speaks for wizards in DrScheme. They'd be easy to add. We could 
>>> spit out tons of scaffolding in no time. -- Matthias
>> Well, I like pretty much anything that helps me code more faster, but 
>> I've never been fond of wizards.  But perhaps I just prefer developing 
>> my own code rather than inheriting someone elses.
>> I find graphical UI editors that spit out code or resources  to be 
>> handy, but I find them most useful when working with one window or 
>> dialog at a time. I might use a UI editor to create every dialog and 
>> window in my application, but never in one big pass.  Instead I use 
>> them iteratively.
>> And, if confronted with a foreign framework, I'd much rather study the 
>> code of a working sample to see how it ticks, rather than having a 
>> wizard generate the code and then tell me just to add my hooks to 
>> lines 30, 1400, and 16041. Burying my code somewhere in a thousand 
>> lines of code I didn't write and don't understand seems to violate a 
>> lot of rules of encapsulation and modularization.
>> Chris Perkins

Posted on the users mailing list.