>>>>> "Paul" == Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Paul> Scheme by far is the best choice for this kind of application, Paul> because it's best at programs that generate other programs. The Paul> other languages mentioned are not even close. I might be wrong, but I think there is some confusion here: I never considered moving from M4. All I'm looking for is a decent language for the driver, i.e., rewrite autoconf.sh into something better than sh.
- Re: Perl vs Scheme vs ML vs ... for autoconf Paul Eggert
- Re: Perl vs Scheme vs ML vs ... for autoconf Russ Allbery
- Re: Perl vs Scheme vs ML vs ... for autoconf Akim Demaille
- Re: Perl vs Scheme vs ML vs ... for autoconf Paul Eggert
- Re: Perl vs Scheme vs ML vs ... for autoconf Guido Draheim
- Re: Perl vs Scheme vs ML vs ... for autoconf Akim Demaille
- Re: Perl vs Scheme vs ML vs ... for autoconf Russ Allbery
- Re: Perl vs Scheme vs ML vs ... for autoconf Akim Demaille
- Re: Perl vs Scheme vs ML vs ... for autoconf Alexandre Oliva
- Re: Perl vs Scheme vs ML vs ... for autoconf Akim Demaille
- Re: Perl vs Scheme vs ML vs ... for autoconf Alexandre Oliva
- Re: Perl vs Scheme vs ML vs ... for autoconf Akim Demaille
- Re: Perl vs Scheme vs ML vs ... for autoconf Gary V . Vaughan