[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?
From: |
Sam Tregar |
Subject: |
Re: To gh_ or not to gh_? |
Date: |
Thu, 10 May 2001 16:27:57 -0400 (EDT) |
On 10 May 2001, Rob Browning wrote:
> - Is it an interpreter independent interface? If so, why?
Because RMS said so? Using google searches to follow broken links from
the Guile docs I recently read the "TCL wars" archives. RMS uses the
language-angnosticism of his proposed GNU scripting language as a major
retorical point justifying a new language. If you read his statements
literally it sounds as though Guile should be handling TCL, C and Python
by now (Perl was also mentioned, but that's pure fantasy)... Has this
goal been discarded? Postponed?
-sam
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, (continued)
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Neil Jerram, 2001/05/05
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Marius Vollmer, 2001/05/05
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Keith Wright, 2001/05/07
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Bill Gribble, 2001/05/07
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Rob Browning, 2001/05/10
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Evan Prodromou, 2001/05/10
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Neil Jerram, 2001/05/11
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Keith Wright, 2001/05/11
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Dirk Herrmann, 2001/05/12
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?,
Sam Tregar <=
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Rob Browning, 2001/05/10
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Sam Tregar, 2001/05/10
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2001/05/12
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Jeff Read, 2001/05/10
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Sam Tregar, 2001/05/11
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Ken Fox, 2001/05/11
- Message not available
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Jeff Read, 2001/05/11
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Jürgen A. Erhard, 2001/05/11
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Lars J. Aas, 2001/05/11
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Rob Browning, 2001/05/11