I know this is policy, but in the case where there are several interpreters available (such is the case of Scheme), might it be more reasonable to put a popular interpreter in dev-lang, and the rest into dev-scheme? This should keep clutter in dev-lang to a minimum, and still allow users to easily browse by their preferred language. What is the thought here?
-Blake Whatchu talkin' 'bout, Willis? > > The builds that I feel should be moved to dev-scheme are: dev-lisp/plt, > > dev-lisp/kawa, dev-lisp/mzscheme, dev-lisp/bigloo, dev-lisp/gauche, > > dev-lisp/drscheme, dev-lisp/chicken, dev-lisp/mit-scheme and dev-util/guile. > > There may be others that I have missed, (Matt, anything?). Guile has the most > > dependencies, with around 34 of them. There may be some debate as to whether > > or not guile should be moved, but as guile is a Scheme interpreter I think > > it's appropriate. > > We seem to have difficulties being consistent in this area, but actual > language compilers / interpreters really belong in dev-lang (for > example, python is in dev-lang, while python extensions and libraries > are located in dev-python). > > Best, > g2boojum > -- > Grant Goodyear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- Blake Matheny [EMAIL PROTECTED] Computer Science is merely the post-Turing http://dev.gentoo.org/~jake/ decline in formal systems theory. http://mkfifo.net/gpg.key
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
