3 ms·
"We've reimplemented the GUI layer, which meant throwing out about 200,000 lines of C++ code that built on Xt, Win32, and Carbon. We've replaced that C++ code w
by TwoBit 16y ago
"We've reimplemented the GUI layer, which meant throwing out about 200,000 lines of C++ code that built on Xt, Win32, and Carbon. We've replaced that C++ code with about 30,000 lines of Racket code that builds on Gtk, Win32, Cocoa, Cairo, and Pango."
That's not the same thing as saying 200K of C++ equals 30K of Scheme.
- jmaygarden 16y agoRight, they could probably have gotten the same effect by staying with C++ and switching to Qt.
- jfoutz 16y agobut then they'd have 80,000 lines of code of non-racket between the language and the OS's GUI. And they'd still have to build a compatibility layer between existing GUI stuff FFI out to QT. Seems like this way they suffer through the platform specific pain themselves, but the bugs are all in a language they want to program in.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- chc 16y agoOf course not. The languages are unrelated, so no precise number of lines in one is equal to any precise number of lines in the other. It is a pretty impressive space savings nonetheless.