code in cvs is broken

[Rob Browning]

linas@linas.org (Linas Vepstas) writes:

> There doesn't seem to be any strong technical reason for a call-back
> design between c and scm in gnucash;  in most cases, it seems that it 
> would be just as easy/quick/efficient to use scheme to push data into 
> the c code.  Right?

In general I agree that simpler is better, and and so I might often
side with you on this one, but I'm not certain enough about our needs
ATM to be sure that calling from C to scheme won't ever be the best
answer to a given problem.  In fact, we already call from C to scheme
quite a bit, and I suspect there will continue to be many cases where
doing so is the most appropriate solution.

As a particular concrete example, consider the GTK code.  Until and
unless we end up handling all our gnome manipulations via gnome-guile,
whenever you want a graphic element to invoke a scheme function,
directly, or indirectly, then there's probably going to be a call from
the C side to the scheme side.

> Recall:  the reason we had C code invoking guile was because the 
> gnucash main loop was in C.  But now that it will be in scheme, 
> the proximate cause will be gone.

Also, with the newer guile, there will be no need for gh_enter, you
will be able to use scm_init_guile and leave your "main" alone.  This
will likely be a boon for wrapper writers.

-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org, @linuxdevel.com, and @debian.org
Previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG=1C58 8B2C FB5E 3F64 EA5C  64AE 78FE E5FE F0CB A0AD