after the racket interview on floss weekly I briefly looked at embedding racket in an application, just checked how feasible it was compared to python3, according to one of the devs the runtime is ~5mb or so. (iirc py lib is under 1mb), for sawfish something minimal like tiny-scheme probably is a better fit.
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 3:30 AM, Heow Goodman <[email protected]> wrote: >> 1 move to another LISP/Scheme dialect (still no decision or team) > > There was a discussion on this topic on LispNYC recently: > > http://groups.google.com/a/lispnyc.org/group/lisp/browse_thread/thread/a66e9796e1e0ed1f/60dfb0b91326bf71?lnk=gst&q=guile#60dfb0b91326bf71 > > I've personally embedded TinyScheme in several projects, it's trivial to > build. However Racket was voted the "Best Common-Lisp Development > Environment" even though it's not CL! :-) ...plus it also runs on > just about anything: x86, MIPS, ARM, PPC, SPARC > > I'm fully ignorant of Rep's history, just curious why Sawfish didn't go > with Guile? > > - h > > On 06/10/2012 05:10 AM, Christopher Roy Bratusek wrote: >> There's no list, but stuff includes: >> >> >> >> near future: >> >> 1 move to another LISP/Scheme dialect (still no decision or team) >> >> 2 merge Sawfish-MMC (only partially in 1.9.0 due lack of time) >> >> 3 use XCB >> >> 4 use GTK3 (majorly effects rep-gtk. Needs to be ported to G-I >> (gobject-introspection) in order to wrap GTK3 -- only a handfull of code >> in Sawfish itself that would need a port) >> >> >> >> not-so-near future: >> >> - prepare for Wayland >> >> >> >> ... [2] might be the easiest, but the other 4 require much more manpower >> than we currently have. >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Chris >> > > > -- > Sawfish ML > -- - Campbell -- Sawfish ML
