On Thu, 03 Sep 2009 20:12:04 -0400, Joe Marshall <[email protected]>
wrote:
> So which Schemes are the leaders of the pack?
What does it mean to be a leader of the pack? I don't think that Schemes
can be compared along a liner gradation of leaders and followers. Each
Scheme is different because they have different goals and desires. I think
you have aptly pointed out that certain features are in widespread use
across different implementations. This is because they are generally
useful and desirable by the representative communities surrounding each
implementation, and useful enough to enough implementations to make a
difference.
I think the question should be rephrased as, which Scheme implementations
are representative of their respective problem domains and how have they
chosen to address needs? If enough domains use the same feature or have a
similiar feautre, it makes sense to standardize.
I would put a few domains in here, not exclusive or disjoint:
1) Commercial Schemes, where I would argue Chez is the quintessential
Scheme here.
2) Compiling Schemes, where Gambit, Chez, Stalin, Chicken, and PLT all
deserve consideration.
3) C based Scheme Compilers: Gambit, Stalin, Chicken, and to some extent
PLT's C based version, but I would consider PLT Less a C oriented Scheme.
4) Native code oriented compilers: Chez, PLT, MIT
5) Pure Interpreters: Scm, Guile, Chibi, Scheme48
6) Java based Schemes: SISC, Kawa
7) Heavyweight Schemes: Chicken, PLT, MIT Scheme, Scm
8) Lightweight Schemes: Chibi, Chez, Gambit
And the list goes on.
In general, I would try to look for features that are agreed upon across
domain boundaries. If all the heavy weight Schemes see one solution, but
the lightweight ones feircely oppose it, it doesn't make sense to
standardize it as part of the core, but it might make sense to standardize
it some other way. Similarly, such as with FFIs, C based Schemes may have
totally different solutions than Native code compilers, and this makes a
difference.
Aaron W. Hsu
--
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its
victims may be the most oppressive. -- C. S. Lewis
_______________________________________________
r6rs-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
