Re: Lisp, Siod and LyX, Guile and ANSI Lisp
sperber(a)informatik.uni-tuebingen.de (Michael Sperber [Mr. Preprocessor]) writes:
>>>>> "Uwe" == Uwe Brauer
<oub(a)eucmos.sim.ucm.es> writes:
Uwe> Thanks for the link. This I was looking for. As I understood it
Uwe> Guile is not considered seriously, why?
The biggest shortcoming is its deep-rooted dependence on
conservative GC. Besides, nobody ever sent me any strong arguments
*for* Guile.
The strongest argument for Guile is, as you state, "the biggest active
development group." Guile is the future extension language of GNU,
and using that might not be such a bad idea. But ultimately, a
hypothetical replacement language should be chosen by its technical
rather than political merit.
The thing that never ceases to amaze me is that, even though Guile
seems to have the biggest active developer group of all the Scheme
implementations, it is only slowly, if at all, catching up with the
implementation quality of other, more carefully designed and better
engineered Schemes, some of which are essentially one-man projects.
I think the "open-source" model is deeply overhyped. Maybe someone
will write a new essay that explains its shortcomings in some detail.