* Re: [9fans] SXM and Plan 9
@ 2004-06-26 16:57 Andrew Pochinsky
2004-06-26 17:40 ` David Tolpin
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Pochinsky @ 2004-06-26 16:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 9fans
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 603 bytes --]
SXM is almost a complete R5RS implementation (it's major omission is
lack of bignums and rational numbers). I ported it to plan9. In my
typical code it runs about two times slower than petite, but your
milage may vary.
--andrew
> From: Vester Thacker <vthacker@0xfe.org>
> Date: June 26, 2004 6:38:27 AM CDT
>Subject: [9fans] SXM and Plan 9
>
>
>Has anyone used SMX with Plan 9? I'm interested to hear whether it
>is a good implementation of Scheme under Plan 9. Or should I consider
>another version? Any schemers out there? Thanks in advance.
>
>--Vester Thacker
>
[-- Attachment #2.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 282 bytes --]
from postmaster@ethel:
The following attachment had content that we can't
prove to be harmless. To avoid possible automatic
execution, we changed the content headers.
The original header was:
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/enriched;
charset=US-ASCII
[-- Attachment #2.2: file.suspect --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 833 bytes --]
<bold><color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>SXM is almost a complete
R5RS implementation (it's major omission is lack of bignums and
rational numbers). I ported it to plan9. In my typical code it runs
about two times slower than petite, but your milage may vary.
--andrew
> From: </color></bold>Vester Thacker <<vthacker@0xfe.org>
<bold><color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>> Date: </color></bold>June
26, 2004 6:38:27 AM CDT
<bold><color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>>Subject: </color>[9fans]
SXM and Plan 9
<color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>></color></bold>
>
>Has anyone used SMX with Plan 9? I'm interested to hear whether it
>is a good implementation of Scheme under Plan 9. Or should I consider
>another version? Any schemers out there? Thanks in advance.
>
>--Vester Thacker
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] SXM and Plan 9
2004-06-26 16:57 [9fans] SXM and Plan 9 Andrew Pochinsky
@ 2004-06-26 17:40 ` David Tolpin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: David Tolpin @ 2004-06-26 17:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
Andrew Pochinsky:
> SXM is almost a complete R5RS implementation (it's major omission is
> lack of bignums and rational numbers). I ported it to plan9. In my
> typical code it runs about two times slower than petite, but your
> milage may vary.
I ported scm but didn't prepare a distribution. works fine for me.
David
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [9fans] SXM and Plan 9
@ 2004-06-26 11:38 Vester Thacker
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Vester Thacker @ 2004-06-26 11:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 9fans
Has anyone used SMX with Plan 9? I'm interested to hear whether it
is a good implementation of Scheme under Plan 9. Or should I consider
another version? Any schemers out there? Thanks in advance.
--Vester Thacker
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-06-26 17:40 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-06-26 16:57 [9fans] SXM and Plan 9 Andrew Pochinsky
2004-06-26 17:40 ` David Tolpin
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-06-26 11:38 Vester Thacker
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).