[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know what that means. I'm implementing Scheme tidbits as SICP reveals them to me. This is a one-in-a-lifetime opportunity not soon to be repeated... ...to actually implement language X while you are learning language X.
Implementing a lisp is easy and fun. Now perhaps we all understand why there are so many lisps, why that may have hurt the adoption, why there are no huge sets of libraries that work with any particular lisp, why there is no documentation, etc. A lot of the people who created their own lisp actually fleshed it out and promoted its use but not enough people so far have gotten behind any one lisp and one standard. Not that it matters for a lot of jobs but it discourages people coming from a perl/python background. And here lies the conundrum: Perl/python were a real pain to implement and took massive amounts of time and are harder to understand conceptually resulting in one main implementation that everyone uses and they have huge mindshare. So which way should we really be going? Hard to implement practically guaranteeing a single implementation yet conceptually muddles or simple to implement and send a hit squad after anyone who proposes that their own toy implementation be used by anyone else?
-- Tracy R Reed Read my blog at http://ultraviolet.org Key fingerprint = D4A8 4860 535C ABF8 BA97 25A6 F4F2 1829 9615 02AD Non-GPG signed mail gets read only if I can find it among the spam. -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
