Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > At 1:58 PM +0000 9/5/02, "Jürgen" "Bömmels" (via RT) wrote: > >The recent discussion of languages independence rememberd me of an > >very old patch of mine which implements scheme pairs. (January 2002). > >The languages/scheme directory did not change very much since then, > >but the key system totally changed since then. > > > >But neverless, I got it running. The dedicate SchemePair PMC is not > >necessary any more, I just used an Array of size 2. > > > >scheme now can create pairs with (cons) and lists with (list), print > >them using (write) and access its elements using > >(car), (cdr), (set-car!) and (set-cdr!). See lists.t for examples. > > Cool, applied. How far from "real" scheme are we?
I think its quite far. The first thing is symbols and strings. But how do I represent them at parrot-level. PerlString maybe, but then how will they be distinct from each other. Or just leave out strings for a while. Lexicals are also missing. I haven't looked closely to that. Without variables a language is not very useful. lambda-expression: this may compile just down to a sub.pmc Functions like map, apply, list?, etc. have to be implemented. Macros, tail-recursion, eval, and call/cc are also needed to call it "real". I hope the next patch will not need another half a year. juergen -- Juergen Boemmels [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fachbereich Physik Tel: ++49-(0)631-205-2817 Universitaet Kaiserslautern Fax: ++49-(0)631-205-3906 PGP Key fingerprint = 9F 56 54 3D 45 C1 32 6F 23 F6 C7 2F 85 93 DD 47
