> What do you all think of these ideas? Are there other ideas around? I > know that Jakub posted something a while ago (haven't looked in detail > yet, though). In my opinion we should try to avoid "yet another > incomplete interpreter implentation" for this year.
I fully agree. Still, what I proposed was not attempt to create another one, but keep existing one alive. It is bothering me, that scheme interpreter is incomplete, but the problem is, i could not find a use case for it (except of Thousand Parsecs internal scripting language - if none other - faster - scheme implementation available). So if PyPy is such a nice platform to experiment, let's do it, and play with different approaches to implement parallel paradigms, or whatsoever. There is no need for yet another scheme interpreter (even complete) if it doesn't have any interesting features. That's my 3 cents for now. Cheers, Jakub Gustak _______________________________________________ [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
