In article <qij3esp7zq3.fsf@lambda.ai.mit.edu>, Olin Shivers
<shivers@lambda.ai.mit.edu> wrote:
> I'll surrender to the temptation to add my two cents to the
> tcl/Scheme flameage. Scheme is beautiful. But the standard doesn't
> pin down enough for practical programming needs -- no exceptions,
> record types, or module system. So everything that's written in the
> language is implementation specific -- not portable.
>
> In contrast to tcl, Scheme also lacks a portable C interface. And so on,
> and so on.
>
> It's not interesting to flame about why tcl is such a horrible language.
> The reasons are all pretty obvious. Tcl solves a problem, horrible though
> it may be, and Scheme, although beautiful, is not capable of solving these
> problems. So the Scheme community needs to just shut up until and unless
> they have a viable alternative to present the world. Less posting; more
> hacking.
Since I'm not doing any hacking my view might not be of interest. But I
fully agree with all of the above (thinking that a module system is
prio#1).
And I would like to add an observation: comp.lang.python is almost twice
the size of comp.lang.scheme.
--
Best Wishes, Bengt
Email: bengtk@damek.kth.se
|