Re: [Chicken-users] Chicken not production quality?

[Tony Sidaway]

On 2/10/07, Alex Queiroz <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hallo,
>
>      Is this right? Why Chicken is not considered production quality?
> Where do you people use it most, and where do you think it's not the
> right tool for the job?

As some others have suggested, that description is pretty old and I
think it needs to be updated.

There are applications for which I would avoid using Chicken, but many
of the limitations apply to other Scheme systems.  I wouldn't use a
garbage-collecting language system for a critical real-time process
control application, for instance.

The most important consideration for production, in my opinion, is
that the code development environment is somewhat limited.  There is
no IDE, and no source code debugger.

On Windows and other GUIs, Chicken lacks native GUI support. On
Windows, it lacks support for .Net.  And in general its OS support is
limited to POSIX.  So if you want to write a Chicken application for
WIndows that makes extensive use of OLE or other proprietory
technologies, you would probably have a lot of C hacking to do.  Of
course this is not a serious problem for Chicken because it allows C
code to be freely mixed with Scheme even in the same compilation unit.
However the integration may fall short of the level one might expect
of an equivalent commercial language system.