Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!charlesk
From: charlesk@netcom.com (Charles Kung)
Subject: Re: STOP ME before I CODE in C again!!!
Message-ID: <charleskDp6GHC.Jwz@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <HJSTEIN.96Mar28125504@blinky.cpaf.com> <SILOVIC.96Mar28164236@jagor.srce.hr> <ABEL.96Mar31212726@blinky.netvision.net.il>
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 09:46:23 GMT
Lines: 27
Sender: charlesk@netcom.netcom.com

abel@netvision.net.il (Harvey J. Stein) writes:



>So, what do we end up with on the net?  We have scm apps, STk apps,
>scheme->C apps, bigloo apps, Elk apps, guile apps, and apps based on
>whatever other particular scheme interpreter I've forgotten to
>mention.

>For the end user, this requires he have installed a half dozen scheme
>systems!  Or, he restricts himself to one interpreter, one sixth of
>the apps, and the scheme world has to be 6 times bigger than the
>Tcl/Tk world to give the user a comparable selection of applications.
>Or, each application distributes itself with a copy of one of the
>above interpreters, making each little application large, and long to
>install.

why is it that tcl, perl, python do not have many variants? imho, these
scripting languages do not suffer from this problem because each has been
created, championed, and nutured by a single leader- respectively, ousterhout,
wall and rossum. the many contributors help port, extend or make the
language widespread, rather than write yet another version.             
scheme seems to suffer the lack of strong leadership, everyone wants
to roll their own, everyone wants to make it their own perfect little
language.  
 

