Re: [Texmacs-dev] Efficiency of scheme implementation

[David Allouche]

On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 11:01:03PM -0500, Michael Graffam wrote:
> > Thanks for the pointer. This will probably still take some time though.
> > In any case, I feel that the Scheme interface should be modified in such
> > a way that it is reasonably easy to plug-in abitrary Scheme implementations.
> 
> Being able to easily plug-in arbitrary Scheme systems would be great.
> It would be relatively easy to create a Scheme dialect in Common Lisp
> (the pseudoscheme implementation might be a good start) that would be
> sufficient for TeXmacs. A Lisp backend would provide the needed foundation
> for a measure of Emacs compatibility, as well as making TeXmacs
> that-much-more flexible.

One thing to keep in mind is the more portable you want it, the least
you can rely on non-portable library functions... note that pure R5RS is
a really poor dialect for any non-trivial amount of programming.

For example, texmacs relies on the the Guile module system,
define-macro, procedure-properties, and maybe on a few other
guile-specific features which might or might not have equivalent on
some other given scheme system.

-- 
                                                            -- ddaa