[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?
From: |
Ivan Raikov |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander? |
Date: |
Fri, 28 Dec 2007 09:51:50 +0900 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) |
Isn't it redundant to say "The compiler ... supports tail
recursion"? After all, if the compiler didn't support tail recursion,
it wouldn't be a Scheme compiler. I also find the first sentence to be
rather cumbersome, and I think the two strongest points of Chicken are
the FFI and the availability of hundreds of eggs. How about the
following:
Chicken Scheme includes an R5RS-conformant compiler and
interpreter. The Chicken library system contains hundreds of
convenient modules for practical use, with new modules being
added daily. Chicken also includes a very flexible and
efficient interface to C and C++. The compiler generates
portable C code and supports first-class continuations and
lightweight threads. The interpreter allows interactive use,
fast prototyping, debugging, and scripting. Extensive
documentation is available.
John Cowan <address@hidden> writes:
> Okay. Next version:
>
> Chicken combines an optimising Scheme compiler with a reasonably
> fast interpreter. It supports most of R5RS and the important SRFIs.
> The compiler generates portable C code and supports tail recursion,
> first-class continuations, and lightweight threads, and the interface to
> and from C code is easy to use. The interpreter allows interactive use,
> fast prototyping, debugging, and scripting. Extensive documentation
> is supplied. The active and helpful Chicken community fixes bugs,
> provides support, and has contributed hundreds of Chicken libraries that
> make the programmer's task easier.
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?, (continued)
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?, felix winkelmann, 2007/12/22
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?, John Cowan, 2007/12/23
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?, Zbigniew, 2007/12/26
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?, John Cowan, 2007/12/26
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?, Peter Busser, 2007/12/27
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?, John Cowan, 2007/12/27
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?, Peter Busser, 2007/12/27
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?, John Cowan, 2007/12/27
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?,
Ivan Raikov <=
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?, John Cowan, 2007/12/27
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?, Ivan Raikov, 2007/12/27
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?, John Cowan, 2007/12/27
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?, Peter Busser, 2007/12/29
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?, Alex Shinn, 2007/12/27
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?, John Cowan, 2007/12/27
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?, Ivan Raikov, 2007/12/27
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?, John Cowan, 2007/12/27
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?, Alex Shinn, 2007/12/27
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?, John Cowan, 2007/12/27