[r6rs-discuss] Implementors' intentions concerning R6RS

From: Abdulaziz Ghuloum <aghuloum>
Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 12:49:04 -0400

On Oct 28, 2007, at 8:24 AM, Elf wrote:

> guile is/was used in tens of non-scheme products, including such
> high visibility programs as gimp.

Guile is endorsed by the FSF as "The GNU Extension Language" and as
the official GNU extension language, Guile failed. Perl, Python,
and Ruby are the extension languages for free software or otherwise.

> chez-scheme has low uptake by most of the community because its
> commercial

Your definition of "the community" seems to exclude all commercial
users. Chez /may/ have low uptake by "the free software community",
I cannot say for sure, but which other Scheme implementation has
any uptake in the commercial/industrial world? Or does that not
matter to you?

> i would be very surprised if these three implementations together
> had a total of 50% of the entire user base.

I say now is the time for you to get surprised.

> speaking as someone who has taught scheme, at least one of these
> implementations is the reason for most undergraduates loathing and
> despising scheme.

First you speak for "the community" and now you talk on behalf of
"most undergrads". Where do you get your stats from?

> heres a fun question: find which implementations have the most code
> written for them before determining who gets the most weight.

If you take code size as a measure, then listen to this: the size
(as in MLOCs) of one application written in Chez could easily dwarf
the size of all the Scheme implementations you mention, combined.
You need to get your facts straight and I'm glad LOCs are now what
determines how the standard are shaped.

Aziz,,,
Received on Sun Oct 28 2007 - 12:49:04 UTC