Guile Mailing List Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Scheme is too complicated
Jay Glascoe <email@example.com> writes:
> <don asbestos suit>
Well that shouldn't be necessary.
> Scheme is weird.
OK, I'll agree with that one. Compared to the non-portable assemblers
people program with, scheme is most unusual.
> Although it's weakly typed, it's not a VHLL like Perl/Python.
I detect an incorrect application of the contrapositive.
Perl/Python not like scheme.
Perl/Python are VHLL's.
Does _not_ imply that scheme is not a VHLL.
I don't see any actual reasons why you think that scheme is not a
VHLL. (There are some reasons that are worthy of discussion, but you
didn't mention any).
> In my experience, functional style Scheme code is concise and, unless
> you're careful, slow.
This is an attribute of a particular implementation, not an intrinsic
property of the language. Let me assure you that there are screaming
fast scheme implementations out there, that can beat C in numerical
code in certain cases, even when the programmer uses a functional
style. Search DejaNews for the postings of Siskind on
> otoh, imperative Scheme is usually about half the size of comparable
> C code (a loop is a loop, a car is a car...), and it's about 3/4 the
> size if don't count the C declarations.
Once you start writing more scheme/lisp, I would expect that your
scheme programs will start to be 3-5 times smaller than the same C
program. Yes I mean 3-5 times. I hope you continue to learn about
scheme; it will expand your programming horizons. Grab a copy of
Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs, and go.
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footsteps of giants.
Guile Home |
Main Index |