[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] Re: No... but it is... interesting...
From: |
Felix |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] Re: No... but it is... interesting... |
Date: |
Thu, 10 Mar 2011 20:30:49 +0100 (CET) |
From: Ivan Shmakov <address@hidden>
Subject: [Chicken-users] Re: No... but it is... interesting...
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 22:01:29 +0600
>
> How do the goals of SPOCK compare to those of Scheme2Js [1]? Is
> it aimed at better R^5RS compliance, in particular?
>
Yes, scheme2js does not support tail calls. There is a paper
describing a call/cc implementation, but I don't know whether this has
been integrated. SPOCK fully handles these things, and also has a
quite powerful syntax-rules implementation (alexpander). Scheme2js is
likely to generate faster and more compact code, though.
cheers,
felix
- [Chicken-users] No... but it is... interesting..., Felix, 2011/03/10
- [Chicken-users] Re: No... but it is... interesting..., Ivan Shmakov, 2011/03/10
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: No... but it is... interesting...,
Felix <=
- Re: [Chicken-users] No... but it is... interesting..., John Cowan, 2011/03/10
- Re: [Chicken-users] No... but it is... interesting..., Erik Falor, 2011/03/10
- Re: [Chicken-users] No... but it is... interesting..., Mario Domenech Goulart, 2011/03/10
- Re: [Chicken-users] No... but it is... interesting..., Markus Klotzbuecher, 2011/03/11