WHICH SCHEME?

Hy guys.

Im about to embark on reading SICP.

Which scheme implementation should I use.

Ubuntu's MIT scheme package fails for me, so what about guile, gambit, ikarus, scheme48,

Five words: DrScheme.  Thread over.

Doesn't really matter. They all suck but SICP doesn't require much. I think I used PLT.

I've been using PLT scheme, which I think is decent enough.

NEVER FORGET THE HEROES THAT GAVE THEIR TIME AND THEIR LIVES TO DIE FOR THE GREATER CAUSE OF MAKING THE PLEASURE OF BEING CUMMED INSIDE A GOOGLE MEME. YOUR SACRIFICE WILL NOT BE FORGOTTEN.

NVR FGT

I was in your shoes not too long ago. You have a couple choices:

1. DrScheme - Good, I didn't enjoy the editor though, I preferred to just use the MzScheme interpreter in Emacs. Has a lot of libraries and they are easy to install (just import them and the first time they will be downloaded).

2. MIT Scheme - Terrible.

3. Guile - Terrible.

4. Gambit - Fast, but terrible.

5. Ikarus - R6RS, Terrible and fast.

6. Scheme48 - Alright module system, but terrible library support and I recall having problems with memory usage.

BTW, you might want to check out Chicken scheme. It has eggs, good library support, fast, and gay.

>>6
Shall I remind you that the standard extensibility interpreter for GNU software is Guile (http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/), which implements the language Scheme (an especially clean and simple dialect of Lisp). Guile also includes bindings for GTK+/GNOME, making it practical to write modern GUI functionality within Guile. We don't reject programs written in other “scripting languages” such as Perl and Python, but using Guile is very important for the overall consistency of the GNU system.

>>6
THanks

Regards,
OP

>>8
Right, because I have a full Gnome desktop, and oddly enough, Guile isn't installed on it, whereas practically everything that uses some sort of scripting is Python or Perl based.

In related news, Guile sucks.

>>10
Suddenly, (eq GNU Gnome).

PLT Scheme is made by the people who brought you R⁶RS.

>>11
Suddenly, you lack reading comprehension.

I never implied what you seem to be suggesting.

>>13
Suddenly, YHB minorly T

>>14
That was either the weakest, saddest troll ever, or you weren't trolling and your response is merely compensatory of this. I believe the latter, as anyone who admits to having been trolling after a mere one post generally wasn't.

>>13
Then please explain to me _{and the rest of /prog/} what bearing having A Complete Gnome Desktop has on the standard extensibility interpreter for GNU software being installed.

>>15
>>11 here, 'twas not a troll at all.

>>16
My implication is that the statement:
Guile also includes bindings for GTK+/GNOME, making it practical to write modern GUI functionality within Guile.
is entirely irrelevant, since none of the core Gnome apps actually use it.

>>18
That doesn't make any sense. The statement was about Guile's usefulness for that purpose.

>>19
If it were really useful, people would use it.

It isn't.

>>20
that's a pretty lol fallacy bra

>>20
It's possible for something to be useful, and remain unused.

>>22
Like my dick. :(

>>23
Hey me too ;_;

>>23
I'm bumping a 13 month old thread because it made me lol.

>>25
Hey, have a bit of sensitivity, will you? How do you think >>23,24 will feel?

>>26
You're an idiot.

I'm using tinyscheme, since all I'm doing is reading SICP, so I don't need PLT's bloat.

>>27
no u                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        

>>27
Redacted for now. Though your comment was stupid, I don't know that you're an idiot. But I'm watching you.

>>28
Thanks for reminding me. Tinyscheme has FFI I think, and I forgot I wanted to see if it was easy to use (no bindings, no byte push/pop).

>>27-30
Why was it stupid? Let's just be friends.

>>32
s/-/,/ goddamn

>>7
Try building it in Windows or OS X. Pain.

This is 2010. We use PLT Scheme for haxing, chicken or tinyscheme for serious work. Don't mess around with MIT bullshite. This is Sparta.

>>35
This is Sparta.
Back to /b/, please.