On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Jens Axel Søgaard
wrote:
> 2015-06-05 6:37 GMT+02:00 Neil Van Dyke :
>
>
>> 2. Forget about `eval`, require apps to be compilable on development host
>> (but not necessarily runnable there), implement compiler from `.zo` to JS
>> (managing TCO, etc.), implement sm
2015-06-05 6:37 GMT+02:00 Neil Van Dyke :
> 2. Forget about `eval`, require apps to be compilable on development host
> (but not necessarily runnable there), implement compiler from `.zo` to JS
> (managing TCO, etc.), implement small Racket runtime library in JS,
> implement browser facilities an
Hello,
Some links on the compilation of scheme to javascript:
https://41ac-a-698ebdfa-s-sites.googlegroups.com/a/loitsch.com/florian/publications/thesis.pdf?attachauth=ANoY7crN4qhkAC3xBCxnobzY3QFWCSKV_jYDgUmtf9IpDLUn72LZ0DY_eeoC0PXiRjkTpcxc9wWI3RmAjpkm7ZkKvqupWHu-nObTHRdoOKnDiLqEAnCDGbh-sYZzR
On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 12:37 AM, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> Thanks, Jens Axel, Raoul, and Robby.
>
> Different question... For support for writing polished Web browser (and
> PhoneGap) apps in Racket, any comments on which of the following two options
> is better (viable, easier to implement and maint
Ah, sorry.
I think it would be a great thing if it were possible to have
something simpler that did Whalesong's job. I feel like this is
possible and something we're moving slowly towards as we chip away at
moving parts of the runtime system up into Racket proper.
Robby
On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 9
I recall Whalesong, and was hoping something simpler would work.
Robby Findler wrote on 06/05/2015 08:21 AM:
You might have a look at Whalesong. It is a racket->js compiler that,
IMO, was headed in a good direction. It's not a small thing, however.
--
You received this message because you are
You might have a look at Whalesong. It is a racket->js compiler that,
IMO, was headed in a good direction. It's not a small thing, however.
Robby
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 11:37 PM, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> Thanks, Jens Axel, Raoul, and Robby.
>
> Different question... For support for writing polishe
Thanks, Jens Axel, Raoul, and Robby.
Different question... For support for writing polished Web browser (and
PhoneGap) apps in Racket, any comments on which of the following two
options is better (viable, easier to implement and maintain, better
performance, etc.)?
1. Implement Racket VM in
Just because no one has mentioned it yet: there is a C implementation
of the VM (and the primitives) so if you have a C compiler and an OS
for that architecture, it shouldn't be too hard.
Robby
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 5:59 PM, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> How hard is it to implement the Racket virtual
Evil question: Has anybody ever looked at how the bytecode could be
interpreted on another VM e.g. JVM?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to racket-us
Depends. If you count all the primitives - then one-month won't be enough.
The actual operations of the virtual machine are certainly doable in a
reasonable amount of time.
A Racket VM written in Racket:
https://github.com/soegaard/meta/blob/master/runtime/racket-eval.rkt
(submodules not suppor
11 matches
Mail list logo
