Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme,comp.lang.misc,gnu.misc.discuss
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!hookup!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!decwrl!netcomsv!netcom.com!thinman
From: thinman@netcom.com (Technically Sweet)
Subject: Re: GNU Extension Language -- Scheme compatible?
Message-ID: <thinmanCyAr6E.F7@netcom.com>
Organization: International Foundation for Internal Freedom
References: <9410190420.AA02904@mole.gnu.ai.mit.edu> 	<MDJ.94Oct23224108@sanscalc.nada.kth.se> 	<OZ.94Oct23202728@nexus.yorku.ca> <LORD.94Oct23214633@x1.cygnus.com> 	<38gjlr$4s6@spot.twinsun.com> 	<MIKEW.94Oct25140603@gopher.dosli.govt.nz> 	<LEWIKK.94Oct25093043@grasshopper.aud.alcatel.com> <LEEI.94Oct25102620@Crazypete.ai.sri.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 1994 20:20:38 GMT
Lines: 10
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.scheme:10680 comp.lang.misc:18453 gnu.misc.discuss:19190

May I respectfully suggest that a Forth interpreter would take up
a lot less space?  Since you're talking about compiling to the
extension language any, it makes sense to compile to something
small and fast, thus keeping the compiled extentions small.

-- 

Lance Norskog
thinman@netcom.com
Artisputtingtogether. Art  s th ow n  aw y.
