From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf1-x129.google.com (mail-lf1-x129.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::129]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 74A833858D32 for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 05:09:46 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 74A833858D32 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-lf1-x129.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-503056c8195so2336829e87.1 for ; Sun, 17 Sep 2023 22:09:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1695013784; x=1695618584; darn=sourceware.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=ko1ljE/HeqA9sP2SmpgrEYzydr08jMrT4FrFsi7wlAo=; b=mKX4FUs3ET9X3JnThab1vddi//N4tlkHzew4lao6cE/HCDtVRkdGKBVhr/W06NSshr ifxrfu7f2tqU2vph+QJoQLGQQQU1kyNCcrpfQTh6jNbf2xjBfjua1zuf04K0oxQByKl6 Zk+KgcEgjxoYOm6Ghs4cVw9xw1qJYBc5o+PLWeJrnPhbckhCG2CE/47lPS6JLJpsUGhg iL6EmvIH8K2jtQKHfc3hOvSortGugEO7QV93rfx6iutVAVO6qmJR2oSsZNyiTtm/OaG4 xY8MYOZpdzbsVYqM2FL/fvlIBTU2RNAH/7nQth1+lOMmWl0AX6vSPZo53VsHZuRsIVql zm3A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1695013784; x=1695618584; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ko1ljE/HeqA9sP2SmpgrEYzydr08jMrT4FrFsi7wlAo=; b=VxC5153BEFrS//CPRmItedhyaK+eIfPoR9snFP+Yi9/eNt5L5H1y5IyVA7iQAQ1KuY qb62K9rtOii72JqHHHNBSxwbKeDInhzZhvLL7JUltnWWziBlUt2DEoTBMKth42RTv2fB yNCQCgZghvyAXurdCD8V3lteQaayfdys6ajOScj1wRjFpsnWeQjK7HqxlFCOcZaFLBj0 q0nigKn9sW+cbehHGmb2Y5PAct0uQJF7Y1DKWdWVX53jEbHSE2HBVR1tD7kt6sEZK5UI wm/LBE5x4ILn6vSVxDNPUW6iVQrDpvoTNtHTAkfs8xcmVjYLcBmrW1svmF2kH/d+He45 GK5w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yx4KBAsoptAWTkzfuIaMCQ7BeWvgrwgylAp3Uy2YqjjmgSbWg0l eD5JDu3iHFYxDGKkZxsbscmmkej2Pex+k9mPxPFNVerCb98= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFRoes1g0P1FBCTFYZltVmJQwtXO7FlnDkNZZYmFoWlw6HXYFkLwK6huPsV6l6IqRw+zPgz2Sc43jNle6rYmdU= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:5f46:0:b0:4fe:af1:c3ae with SMTP id 6-20020ac25f46000000b004fe0af1c3aemr6030578lfz.15.1695013784249; Sun, 17 Sep 2023 22:09:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1dccac2d-bf49-9326-446d-6b00d77595a3@bothner.com> In-Reply-To: From: Damien Mattei Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 07:09:33 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: A bug in Kawa reader To: Per Bothner Cc: kawa@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: i do not see any future for scheme syntax, it is too boring compared to Pyt= hon, here is a comparaison i wrote between Scheme+, an extended Scheme and Pytho= n: https://racket.discourse.group/t/comparison-of-code-between-scheme-an-enhan= ced-scheme-language-and-python/2317 but it is unfortunately very slower than Python because Scheme+ is written in Scheme. But it could be used for learning, teaching functional programming or for programming algorithms not too much time-critical. (I'm currently testing it with Guile scheme to see if it is faster or not than with Racket ,not sure at all, as Guile seems very slower than Racket with vectors in my other codes) I'm searching help with developers of Scheme implementations that have the skills to integrate the features and syntax of Scheme+ at low level in the core implementation of Scheme. SRFI 105 Curly is needed first. I would be interested in testing a version compiled for java byte-code to see if it is faster than with Racket or Guile. I'm sure it should be very fast. Damien On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 6:05=E2=80=AFPM Per Bothner wrote: > > On 3/2/23 23:08, Damien Mattei wrote: > > noone interested in making a reader that support SRFI-105 ,curly infix = for Kawa? it should be quite easy, when i have time i prospect to do it... > > I see little value in srfi-105. Who would use it and why? > > If you want infix notation with Scheme semantics, you > might find my "KaShell" experiment interesting: > http://kashell.org/ > (KaShell was previously called "q2".) > There are some examples/tests in gnu/q2/testsuite in the source-code. > > KaShell has infix operators, with precedence - without reserved operators= . > (While not implemented, a 'define-operator' would be conceptually > similar to define-syntax, but with precedence levels.) > > On goal of KaShell is to be a nice language for REPL, specifially > like a "rich shell" with typed values. That is why it avoids > needless parenteses and semi-colon-like delimiters. > Instead, KsShell uses indentation. > > Large parts of the syntax I haven't decided on yet. You can "fall back" > on using Scheme macros: > let ((x (3 * 4))) (x + 20) > which is equivalent to Scheme: > (let ((x (* 3 4))) (+ x 20)) > but of course that is not very satisfactory. > > I haven't worked on KaShell in almost 5 years, but hopefully I'll > get back to it someday. Until then, maybe someone will be inspired. > -- > --Per Bothner > per@bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/