9fans - fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* 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).