Home > Archive > Scheme > April 2005 > searching again for an implementation
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
searching again for an implementation
|
|
|
| I'm looking librep for this next project. The comments I
can find are that it implements a dialect of Lisp (and I
know Scheme is a dialect). Does librep implement the full
R5RS, or enough of it, to be a reasonable implementation?
(Close to the standard, etc.)
Also, I'm trying to compile librep under cygwin. The make
fails saying there is something wrong with sdbm.la. Any
thoughts on why this might be happening?
Mike
(cd .libs && rm -f md5.la && ln -s ../md5.la md5.la)
/bin/sh ../libtool --mode=compile gcc -c -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../src -I.. -g -O2 -Wall -Wpointer-arith -Wmissing-prototypes ffi.c
gcc -c -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../src -I.. -g -O2 -Wall -Wpointer-arith -Wmissing-prototypes ffi.c -DPIC -o .libs/ffi.o
/bin/sh ../libtool --mode=link gcc -avoid-version -module -rpath /usr/local/libexec/rep/i686-pc-cygwin -o ffi.la ffi.lo
libtool: link: warning: undefined symbols not allowed in i686-pc-cygwin shared libraries
rm -fr .libs/ffi.a .libs/ffi.la .libs/ffi.lai
ar cru .libs/ffi.a
ranlib .libs/ffi.a
creating ffi.la
(cd .libs && rm -f ffi.la && ln -s ../ffi.la ffi.la)
** Error: sdbm.la has no associated shared library;
** You may be missing a shared library from:
make: *** [check-dl] Error 1
real 1m47.324s
user 1m57.150s
sys 0m37.297s
| |
| Ulrich Hobelmann 2005-03-24, 4:01 pm |
| Mike wrote:
> I'm looking librep for this next project. The comments I
> can find are that it implements a dialect of Lisp (and I
> know Scheme is a dialect). Does librep implement the full
> R5RS, or enough of it, to be a reasonable implementation?
> (Close to the standard, etc.)
Looking at http://librep.sourceforge.net/ I'd say it's not Scheme
at all, so no R5RS. It says it's inspired by Emacs Lisp (which I
would read negatively :D). If its features are good for you, use
it, otherwise you might be better off with a more standard Scheme
or Common Lisp implementation.
| |
|
| In article <3agidtF6cnl03U1@individual.net>, Ulrich Hobelmann wrote:
> Mike wrote:
>
> Looking at http://librep.sourceforge.net/ I'd say it's not Scheme
> at all, so no R5RS. It says it's inspired by Emacs Lisp (which I
> would read negatively :D). If its features are good for you, use
> it, otherwise you might be better off with a more standard Scheme
> or Common Lisp implementation.
Thanks, I had missed that. I like what scheme48 has, but don't want
a VM image (like smalltalk) to push around. I also like tinyscheme.
Any suggestions?
Mike
| |
| Ulrich Hobelmann 2005-03-24, 8:58 pm |
| Mike wrote:
> Thanks, I had missed that. I like what scheme48 has, but don't want
> a VM image (like smalltalk) to push around. I also like tinyscheme.
> Any suggestions?
What's your project? What do you expect from your Lisp?
I personally like PLT and scheme48 and don't really know the others...
| |
| Hans Oesterholt-Dijkema 2005-03-24, 8:58 pm |
| You could also have a look at bigloo, which
will compile your scheme program to C and compile
that to an executable.
--
Hans
| |
|
| In article <3ago33F673mmdU3@individual.net>, Ulrich Hobelmann wrote:
> Mike wrote:
>
> What's your project? What do you expect from your Lisp?
>
> I personally like PLT and scheme48 and don't really know the others...
Two actually. One is using Scheme instead of PERL to play with
analysis of stock market data, the second is to use Scheme as
a systems programming language instead of PERL. For the second
I want the Scheme implementation to be small, fast, a compiler
would be fun to play with, and compilable on unix (multiple
flavors) and windoze both with and without cygwin.
Mike
| |
| Ulrich Hobelmann 2005-03-24, 8:58 pm |
| Mike wrote:
> Two actually. One is using Scheme instead of PERL to play with
> analysis of stock market data, the second is to use Scheme as
> a systems programming language instead of PERL. For the second
> I want the Scheme implementation to be small, fast, a compiler
> would be fun to play with, and compilable on unix (multiple
> flavors) and windoze both with and without cygwin.
There's scsh, the Scheme shell, based on scheme48, but I haven't
tried it. Like Perl or Bourne Shell, it's not compiled (I guess
it uses bytecode + on-the-fly compilation, like scheme48; maybe
you could use images as scripts, though).
| |
| Raffael Cavallaro 2005-04-08, 4:01 pm |
| On 2005-03-24 16:32:30 -0500, Mike <mikee@mikee.ath.cx> said:
> One is using Scheme instead of PERL to play with
> analysis of stock market data, the second is to use Scheme as
> a systems programming language instead of PERL. For the second
> I want the Scheme implementation to be small, fast, a compiler
> would be fun to play with, and compilable on unix (multiple
> flavors) and windoze both with and without cygwin.
Gauche at <http://www.shiro.dreamhost.com/scheme/gauche/> is a nice
Scheme interpreter that can be built on *nix, Windows (cygwin), and Mac
OS X. It's pretty fast, and has unicode support too. I've been
favorably impressed with it, but other more experienced schemers here
may have other views. The only requirement of yours it doesn't meet is
Windows *without* cygwin.
|
|
|
|
|