Duplication of effort.

From: Harvey J. Stein <hjstein_at_bfr.co.il>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 17:39:57 +0200

1. one implementation = good, many = bad.

I can't find the quote now, but I recall seeing an argument along the
line of this as the reason for why TCL & perl are popular & why there
should be effort to merge scheme implementations. My question to this
view is if this is the case then why are there so many different C
compilers/Fortran compilers/...?

2. The one true merge.

Lars Thomas Hansen <lth_at_ccs.neu.edu> writes:

> I think a reasonable growth path for the STk community would be to
> *abandon* the STk core and move the interesting features of the system
> -- object system, Tk interface -- to an independently-supported
> well-performing portable Scheme system like Gambit-C, MzScheme,
> RScheme, Scheme48, or Bigloo.

I heard that there was work on co-compatibility btw STk & Bigloo.

3. Put your money where your mouth is.

If you think it's a good idea to merge Scheme implementations, then do
it! Why argue about it on the net? Or is the idea to try to convince
developers to do the work for you?

Harvey J. Stein
BFM Financial Research
Received on Tue Oct 06 1998 - 17:40:37 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Jul 21 2014 - 19:38:59 CEST