[r6rs-discuss] Interpreters need not apply?
agj at alum.mit.edu
Wed Mar 7 11:30:46 EST 2007
| Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 13:47:19 -0500
| From: John Cowan <cowan at ccil.org>
| Aubrey Jaffer scripsit:
| > Although the motivation for Scheme macros may have been to reduce
| > the number of primitive forms, its effect has been the
| > proliferation of mutually incomprehensible language dialects, as
| > though R5RS was not sufficient in itself for all varieties of
| > programming.
| The "Subtract one from data location N and if it becomes zero jump
| to program location J" machine is also sufficient in itself for all
| varieties of programming.
I have 70000 lines of mathematical, scientific, engineering, database,
and scripting software written in Scheme showing that R5RS is
sufficient without syntax extensions. How much one-instruction
assembly code have you written?
More information about the r6rs-discuss