scsh-users
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Comparison between emacs, clisp, scsh for scripts.

To: scsh-news@zurich.ai.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Comparison between emacs, clisp, scsh for scripts.
From: Pascal Bourguignon <too.much.spam@example.com>
Date: 11 Aug 2002 23:53:50 +0200
Organization: informatimago.com
sperber@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de (Michael Sperber [Mr.  Preprocessor]) 
writes:

> >>>>> "Pascal" == Pascal Bourguignon <too.much.spam@example.com> writes:
> 
> Pascal> Language:       ELisp / CommonLisp        Scheme            Common 
> Lisp
> 
> Pascal> Scripting:      Best set of file    Better set of
> Pascal>                 editing functions.  scripting (process
> Pascal>                                     management) functions.
> 
> Pascal> Libraries:      Full range of       Few existing lib.   Full range of
> Pascal>                 libraries & appl.   or script/appl.     libraries & 
> appl.
> Pascal> --------------  ------------------  ------------------  
> ------------------
> 
> I would claim that scsh comes with a full range of "libraries & appl."
> It would help if you were more specific about what you're missing.
> 
> -- 
> Cheers =8-} Mike
> Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla

Perhaps I'm  wrong here.  In effect,  I forgot to  look up  for scheme
libraries  and  applications  that   could  be  integrated  with  scsh
scripts/programs.

But I've  been surprised  to see  that it was  slower and  bigger than
emacs or clisp.

-- 
__Pascal_Bourguignon__                   http://www.informatimago.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>