I added a column to my Scheme Implementation spreadsheet. http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=twRSWnj1h-j_F3IHRXxwrmg&output=html
That is `Arbitrary Metric A' As the name suggests, it is arbitrary. However, it is also a metric. My opinion about the merits of any particular scheme implementation was not a factor. Metric A sucks. It cannot be independently verified, it's relevancy cannot be determined, the bias is unknown. It has exactly one virtue: it has a value. I'd like to come up with something better, but until I do, here it is. If you have an objective metric, give me the values, (or better yet, tell us how to derive them!!!) and I'll add a column for that. -------- Not only did I have the temerity to measure Scheme implementations on a hidden scale (it could have been a Ouija board), I had the temerity to *rank* the implementations. Furthemore, I divided them into four broad tiers. Tier 1 is the powerhouse implementations. Of course PLT scheme is the most popular scheme. I was surprised to find that Gauche is tremendously popular. I've heard of it, but never used it. I was also surprised, but pleased to see MIT Scheme is still popular enough to stand out from the crowd. Tier 2 is the usual suspects. These implementations are well known and have a solid following. The surprise here is that EdScheme is in this tier but Chez Scheme is not and that Scsh is here but Scheme 48 is not. Tier 3 is the `genus omne'. Tier 4 is the obscure implementations. -- ~jrm _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
