Alan Watson wrote: > > When performance matters, I would rather run correct code > > on a fast system than buggy code on a slow system, but YMMV. > > ... and, if I elect to use an interpreter[*] and unless other > considerations intervene, I would rather use one that integrated > vector-map and other important library procedures. But then I'm funny > like that.
Which raises an interesting question... To what extent does the push to add new procedures to the R6RS, including procedures that are simple compositions of other R6RS procedures, derive from fear that these procedures would be too slow if Scheme programmers were to write them themselves or to use a portable reference implementation? In other words, how much of the growing size of the R6RS can be blamed on the Scheme community's habit of using interpreters instead of compilers? Will _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list r6rs-discuss@lists.r6rs.org http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
