Scheme as a virtual machine?
namekuseijin at gmail.com
Thu Nov 25 17:11:19 CET 2010
On 25 nov, 09:23, Elena <egarr... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 13, 9:09 pm, namekuseijin <namekusei... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 11 out, 08:49, Oleg Parashchenko <ole... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > > I'd like to try the idea that Scheme can be considered as a new
> > > portable assembler. We could code something in Scheme and then compile
> > > it to PHP or Python or Java or whatever.
> > > Any suggestions and pointers to existing and related work are welcome.
> > > Thanks!
> > > My current approach is to take an existing Scheme implementation and
> > > hijack into its backend. At this moment Scheme code is converted to
> > > some representation with a minimal set of bytecodes, and it should be
> > > quite easy to compile this representation to a target language. After
> > > some research, the main candidates are Gambit, Chicken and CPSCM:
> > >http://uucode.com/blog/2010/09/28/r5rs-scheme-as-a-virtual-machine-i/...
> > > If there is an interest in this work, I could publish progress
> > > reports.
> > > --
> > > Oleg Parashchenko olpa at http://uucode.com/http://uucode.com/blog/ XML, TeX, Python, Mac, Chess
> > it may be assembler, too bad scheme libs are scattered around written
> > in far too many different flavors of assembler...
> > It warms my heart though to realize that Scheme's usual small size and
> > footprint has allowed for many quality implementations targetting many
> > python and you have a slow c bytecode interpreter and a slow
> > bytecode .NET compiler. Take haskell and its so friggin' huge and
> > complex that its got its very own scary monolithic gcc. When you
> > think of it, Scheme is the one true high-level language with many
> > quality perfomant backends -- CL has a few scary compilers for native
> Take R5RS Scheme and you get a language which doesn't allow you to get
> things done.
> Scheme is as far from Assembly as one language can be. Assembly
> exists to get things done, R5RS Scheme does not even allows you load
> native libraries of the underlying operating-system, does it? It's
> easy to stay small and clean when you don't have to dirty your hands
> with such crap as real-world applications development.- Ocultar texto das mensagens anteriores -
assembly in the sense that it's what other languages could compile
In any case, the original poster was advocating the opposite: to code
in Scheme and compile it to more common backends, such as PHP or
followed were far more entertaining anyway... :)
More information about the Python-list