On Sun, 20 Jun 2010 16:00:44 +0200 Alexander Teinum <atei...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Use Scheme. See Scheme 48 <http://s48.org/> for a nice, simple > > implementation to start hacking on. > This thread is about a replacement for X, but we’re also discussing > development of “regular” applications. What exactly would you > recommend Scheme for? Scheme *should* be used for almost everything -- bootloaders, OS kernels, hardware drivers, tiny user utilities (like (Plan 9) ls and mc; Unix ls no longer qualifies as a tiny utility, and should not be written at all), long-running servers, etc. -- everything but x86 boot sectors should be written in Scheme. Unfortunately, the readily available Scheme systems are unsuited for most of those tasks. At the moment, Scheme *can* be used for scripting and moderately large user applications (roughly, any daemon with a built-in or otherwise firmly attached GUI -- think mail UAs and multi-file editors for common examples). For low-level programming (kernels and drivers), you would need a Scheme compiler with support for compile-time and explicitly specified run-time memory allocation, as well as good type inference and support for explicitly specified physical types. For small utilities, you would need a Scheme implementation with a small run-time library. Long-running servers would benefit from the same compiler capabilities that low-level programming requires, but you can usually do without them. Robert Ransom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
