Re: [Chicken-users] Msgpack implementation for scheme (and some questions)

[Alaric Snell-Pym]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 01/31/2013 01:06 AM, Hugo Arregui wrote:

>> I've been poking around the msgpack-repositories, they support a lot of
>> languages! It's real neat that Chicken Scheme now joins in on the fun too.
>> So, looking at the node.js port, it seems like they've created js-bindings
>> to the official C library. Perhaps this might be suitable for Chicken Scheme
>> too? From what I can tell, you are reimplementing most of the functionality
>> from scratch, is that correct?
>
> That's right, in fact, when I started the project I think to do so,
> just create the bindings, but, to be honest, I think it will more fun
> if I do it from scratch.

In general, I think it's better to write stuff in pure Scheme when we
can. Sure, dump to C if it's too much work to write a performant
implementation yourself and there's a handy library, etc, but the more
code that's in Scheme, the more code that can be ported to other
implementations, is less likely to have EVIL POINTER BUGS, etc...

ABS

- --
Alaric Snell-Pym
http://www.snell-pym.org.uk/alaric/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAlEKNfgACgkQRgz/WHNxCGqDVwCePsnOIX08PRq19KDPc8Rhy2fA
c0AAn1nEjMJI74HgQNUuHZuEcx+2P5WJ
=xcN0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----