This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Guile project.
Re: Translators, yet once more (Re: PHP fork project- Guile vs Python vs ?)
- To: "Khimenko Victor" <guile at khim dot sch57 dot msk dot ru>
- Subject: Re: Translators, yet once more (Re: PHP fork project- Guile vs Python vs ?)
- From: Michael Livshin <mlivshin at bigfoot dot com>
- Date: 10 Jul 2000 22:04:41 +0200
- Cc: moshez at math dot huji dot ac dot il, kanderso at bbn dot com, guile at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
- Organization: who? me?
- References: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10007101528550.15573-100000@sundial><AFfZXQvaiG@khim.sch57.msk.ru>
"Khimenko Victor" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Tracebacks aren't part of the language definition. (Exceptions are though,
> > but I'm planning to simulate those with continuations, and not rely on whatever mechanism guile develops for exceptions)
> Don't to it ! Continuations are REAL slow in guile and Python relies on
> exceptions quite heavily.
er, so what exactly are you leaving the guy with?
Scheme continuations are always presented as *the* way to emulate the
behaviour of all the other control facilities. if you define Scheme
as a language that other languages are meant to be translated to, then
well, Scheme with handicapped continuations _isn't_.
that said, being C-friendly doesn't necessarily dictate the current
Guile execution model and nothing else. better things *are* possible,
though they are not as bog-simple.
[ and all this assuming that translating into Scheme is a good idea,
which I'm not at all sure of ]
This program posts news to billions of machines throughout the galaxy. Your
message will cost the net enough to bankrupt your entire planet. As a result
your species will be sold into slavery. Be sure you know what you are doing.
Are you absolutely sure you want to do this? [yn] y