From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 04 Apr 2011 21:35:26 -0000."
	<86vcythf8h.fsf@cmarib.ramside>
References: <86fwpz55nj.fsf@cmarib.ramside>
	<257867.782e4d7b.wsc0.mx@tumtum.plumbweb.net>
	<5ddd9deccbea5e8556dfc0c228b63311@ladd.quanstro.net>
	<BANLkTik=fh5sAr5cR+PRNGD+LJETeOgyqA@mail.gmail.com>
	<86vcythf8h.fsf@cmarib.ramside>
Date: Tue,  5 Apr 2011 10:05:55 -0700
From: Bakul Shah <bakul@bitblocks.com>
Message-Id: <20110405170555.B49E6B84A@mail.bitblocks.com>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Making read(1) an rc(1) builtin?
Topicbox-Message-UUID: c9ff6e98-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

I don't want to get into the rc discussions but this caught my
eye:

> I would use scheme, but the scheme in fgb's contrib doesn't seem
> to provide any way of stat(2)ing path names without resorting to
> its foreign function interface.  :(

I am adding a bunch of stuff to Nils Holm's s9fes (Scheme 9
from Empty Space) Scheme interpreter. Mainly access to most of
the syscalls (including stat). libc as needed (though I first
try to implement its functions in s9). I can do things like

(define fd (sys:open "foo" 0))
(display (sys:read fd 10000))
(sys:close fd)

I won't touch threads or things like seg*(), *brk() for now at
least.  Goal is to see how well one can do systems programming
in Scheme.  More to do but let me know if you are interested.