Didier> Speaking about that, does anybody have experience in both Guile and Didier> Elk ? I'd be interested in a comparison. For what I can see now, Elk is very Didier> well documented, has usefull extensions like unix (syscalls) and X11, I did a lot of work with Elk in the 2.x releases. The code is indeed mature and well-documented. Especially the interface to C is very well thought-out, and light years beyond what Guile provides. Moreover, it does precise garbage collection. Elk is considerably slower than SCM, and most other Scheme implementations. I don't know how it compares to Guile which is also slower than SCM. Didier> and seems to be usable in multi-threaded apps. I don't know what you mean by this, but it's wrong by almost any definition. Elk is not thread-safe and it does not provide a thread library. Didier> The lastest release occured last year though. Actually, the latest release was in 1996. Some minor patches have accumulated, but that's about all. Elk development is pretty much dead, and there's just too much stuff missing. I'm afraid it's not a very viable candidate for us.- Didier> On the contrary, guile seems far less mature, not very clean, Didier> and the documentation is completely out-of-date. Maybe it's Didier> just August, but the guys on the mailing list seem very closed Didier> on themselve. I'm wondering how they can expect more people to Didier> get involved in guile development under those conditions. Tell me about it. -- Cheers =8-} Chipsy Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla