firstname.lastname@example.org (Steven L Jenkins) wrote:
> I haven't played with Cormac's system, but I've played a good bit with
> Soft Scheme and have been extremely disappointed in it's performance -- it
> makes scsh look like a greyhound speed-wise.
Huh? I don't even begin to understand this comparison. Soft Scheme
is not a compiler; it's a language pre-processor (if you will). Scsh
is a language implementation. Soft Scheme is entirely dependent upon
the underlying Scheme for its performance, while Scsh is (in a sense)
the underlying Scheme itself.
> But in an 'optimizing'
> compiler, such speed can be worth it's cost when combined with something
> that can produce results.
Perhaps you've misunderstood the purpose of Soft Scheme. It isn't
meant to be an interactive tool that gets invoked each time you type
an expression into the repl, say. You're supposed to do an off-line
analysis, and run only the output file. Of course, it does the
analysis fairly quickly, so in a pinch (but not too much of one) you
could use it in the former manner.
> Have you guys at Rice been doing anything
> like that?
Like the system in DrScheme? Sure, it's meant for interactive,
incremental and modular analysis. As the Java people would say, it's
fully buzzword-compliant. Some of it has been built, some of it is
being built even as we speak (the past three days have had major