This is the mail archive of the guile@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the Guile project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: PHP fork project- Guile vs Python vs ?


On Wed, Jul 05, 2000 at 07:51:30AM -0700, Trevor Lowing wrote:
> The only advantage I see to Guile from what I have seen is that GNUCash is 
> (apparently) using it. Until mainstream apps start using it development will 
> be slow. Newsgroup postings don't show a very positive attitude toward 
> Guile. Here is a comment from Christopher Browne posted to comp.lang.lisp , 
> "Guile suffered from the problem of nobody working on it for quite a while; 
> that period appears to be over.  Mind you, there is _still_ not the "systems 
> integration" done on making it _easy_ to transform it into a compiled form 
> (e.g. - via "Hobbit") so it is _EASY_ to compile Guile code into fast 
> machine code, for all that people have suggested that this _could_ be done.

I tried doing this a while ago... the module system made it complicated enough
that I decided to just wait until the new module system comes around.

Whoever decided to do the module system in Scheme, IMO, must have been on
crack. Or I guess maybe they just didn't think of using a compiler with
guile... but this will be fixed in the near future (3-6 months I would guess).

But anyway, I have tried many other scripting systems and I came back to Guile
because:

1. Simple, powerful language
2. Lots of libraries
3. Easy to interface with C

Which gives it a better foundation than anything else I've seen. All
of the biggest problems (module system, startup speed, documentation)
are being addressed. So it's not perfect, or even the best out there
right now, but it's getting there.

-- 
C. Ray C. aka Christopher Cramer
crayc@pyro.net
http://www.pyro.net/~crayc/

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]