[r6rs-discuss] Interpreters need not apply?

From: Aubrey Jaffer <agj>
Date: Wed Mar 7 11:31:24 2007

 | Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 13:47:19 -0500
 | From: John Cowan <cowan_at_ccil.org>
 |
 | Aubrey Jaffer scripsit:
 |
 | > Although the motivation for Scheme macros may have been to reduce
 | > the number of primitive forms, its effect has been the
 | > proliferation of mutually incomprehensible language dialects, as
 | > though R5RS was not sufficient in itself for all varieties of
 | > programming.
 |
 | The "Subtract one from data location N and if it becomes zero jump
 | to program location J" machine is also sufficient in itself for all
 | varieties of programming.

I have 70000 lines of mathematical, scientific, engineering, database,
and scripting software written in Scheme showing that R5RS is
sufficient without syntax extensions. How much one-instruction
assembly code have you written?
Received on Wed Mar 07 2007 - 11:30:46 UTC