This is the mail archive of the guile@sources.redhat.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 Sun, 9 Jul 2000, Mark Galassi wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, Jul 09, 2000 at 04:50:04PM -0600, Richard Stallman wrote:
> > > There is lots of experience with translating other languages into
> > > Scheme and Lisp, so we know it is practical.  We've already decided to
> > > do things this way.
> > 
> > It might be good to point to that: your original decision, many years ago,
> > was based on Adam Sah's tcl->scheme compiler called Rush which was
> > vaporware (Adam's own words).  Adam later admitted being embarassed
> > that he had over-sold it and that you had taken it so seriously.
> 
> Ummmm.....I'm not Stallman, and I don't know what he based his original
> decision on. However, if I were asked the same question, I would give the
> same answer, so I think I can explain some of the rational. Scheme was
> built especially as a "universal language": one that it possible to
> translate any language into. In fact, I believe that for most languages it
> can be done via translating the parse tree into an S-expression, and
> writing some macros and some support functions. Things like GC (which ends
> any question about object life time) and continuations (which can simulate
> any flow control structure) help immensely here. Try and read SICP to see
> how easily a translator of a language is written in Scheme.
> 
> > I still think the best approach is to endorse another non-lisp-like language
> > (probably Python), and make it easy to link to both Scheme and Python
> > interpreter libraries.  That way you cover both types of users, and they
> > can use the real languages they are accustomed to.
> 
> As a core Python develper let me comment here that Python is highly
> unsuited for what you want here. In particular, classic Python does not
> have continuations or tail-recursion, and has only partial GC. This is
> enough for Python (which is a great language) but not enough to trnslate
> (e.g.) Scheme into Python. However, translating Python into Scheme shuold
> be a 2-week project once a sufficiently module system and object system
> evolve. 

Has a module system and object system been arranged? Is it possible
for people to start coding it? or has this already started?



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