David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> skribis: > l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > >> Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> skribis: >> >>> But, in the event that David wants to continue with his current >>> strategy, there are other things that can be done. David, did you know >>> that Guile's evaluator is implemented in Scheme? That means that if you >>> want an evaluator with different semantics -- for example, something >>> closer to Kernel[0], as David appears to want -- then you can implement >>> an evaluator that provides for fexprs and the like, and it will run >>> about as well as Guile's evaluator. >> >> Indeed. FWIW, Skribilo [0] has its own input language, which is similar >> to but different from Scheme, so it has its own reader and its own >> evaluator, the latter being mostly a wrapper around ‘eval’. This >> strategy has worked well, and portably between 1.8 and 2.0. > > There is a saying
[...] I just meant to say that this strategy can work, but of course YMMV. Ludo’.
