Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Racket-On-Chez Status

blog.racket-lang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 21 posts

Re: Racket-On-Chez Status

#11

Post by aidenn0 »

pankajdoharey wrote: post #3

WOW this just makes it one of the best implementation of scheme, though i would love to see the chez backend version to produce executable binaries like chicken scheme or current raco compiler does. The current chez scheme supports only fasl binaries which require a scheme interpreter to be distributed. The only hacky way currently is chez-exe.

Are there any scheme implementations that dump executables the way e.g. cmucl or clozureCL do? That is they dump the entire core to disk and prepend the runtime. This is actually the more traditional way of creating an executable (all of the static compiling ones I'm aware of derive from a single implemenation, KCL)

Re: Racket-On-Chez Status

#13

Post by geokon »

pankajdoharey wrote: post #3

WOW this just makes it one of the best implementation of scheme, though i would love to see the chez backend version to produce executable binaries like chicken scheme or current raco compiler does. The current chez scheme supports only fasl binaries which require a scheme interpreter to be distributed. The only hacky way currently is chez-exe.

Note that raco doesn't make static binaries unfortunately (b/c Racket is LGPL.. which is a bit unusual for programming language)

Re: Racket-On-Chez Status

#14

Post by bjoli »

pmoriarty wrote: post #8
pankajdoharey wrote: post #3

WOW this just makes it one of the best implementation of scheme, though i would love to see the chez backend version to produce executable binaries like chicken scheme or current raco compiler does. The current chez scheme supports only fasl binaries which require a scheme interpreter to be distributed. The only hacky way currently is chez-exe.

I'd love to be wrong on this, but from what I understand Chicken Scheme can no longer produce static binaries.

IIRC it can, but whenever you use eggs (chicken libraries) there might be some limitations to whether you can create a fat executable or have to distribute the runtime and the eggs together with your application.

There is more info here: https://wiki.call-cc.org/man/4/Deployment

Re: Racket-On-Chez Status

#15

Post by bjoli »

throwaway7645 wrote: post #6

Glad to hear this hasn't stalled.

On the contrary. The racket7 repo is full of activity. In fact, I have many times wondered whether mflatt is a code producing robot. Just racket7 seems like more than a one-man job at times, with non-trivial patching of chez and lots and lots of new code.

Re: Racket-On-Chez Status

#16

Post by soegaard »

geokon wrote: post #13
pankajdoharey wrote: post #3

WOW this just makes it one of the best implementation of scheme, though i would love to see the chez backend version to produce executable binaries like chicken scheme or current raco compiler does. The current chez scheme supports only fasl binaries which require a scheme interpreter to be distributed. The only hacky way currently is chez-exe.

Note that raco doesn't make static binaries unfortunately (b/c Racket is LGPL.. which is a bit unusual for programming language)

The license will soon(ish) change:

https://github.com/racket/racket/issues/1570

Re: Racket-On-Chez Status

#17

Post by [deleted] »

soegaard wrote: post #16
geokon wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that raco doesn't make static binaries unfortunately (b/c Racket is LGPL.. which is a bit unusual for programming language)

The license will soon(ish) change: https://github.com/racket/racket/issues/1570

[deleted]

Re: Racket-On-Chez Status

#18

Post by pflanze »

aidenn0 wrote: post #11
pankajdoharey wrote: post #3

WOW this just makes it one of the best implementation of scheme, though i would love to see the chez backend version to produce executable binaries like chicken scheme or current raco compiler does. The current chez scheme supports only fasl binaries which require a scheme interpreter to be distributed. The only hacky way currently is chez-exe.

Are there any scheme implementations that dump executables the way e.g. cmucl or clozureCL do? That is they dump the entire core to disk and prepend the runtime. This is actually the more traditional way of creating an executable (all of the static compiling ones I'm aware of derive from a single implemenation, KCL)

Scheme 48: http://www.s48.org/1.9.2/manual/manual-Z-H-4.html#node_sec_3...

Re: Racket-On-Chez Status

#19

Post by samth »

geokon wrote: post #13
pankajdoharey wrote: post #3

WOW this just makes it one of the best implementation of scheme, though i would love to see the chez backend version to produce executable binaries like chicken scheme or current raco compiler does. The current chez scheme supports only fasl binaries which require a scheme interpreter to be distributed. The only hacky way currently is chez-exe.

Note that raco doesn't make static binaries unfortunately (b/c Racket is LGPL.. which is a bit unusual for programming language)

The license doesn't have anything to do with the behavior of `raco`.

Re: Racket-On-Chez Status

#20

Post by samth »

hyperion2010 wrote: post #5

Looks like there is a fundamental tradeoff for startup time here which might prevent using racket directly as a subshell (there are ways around this such as making the racket process a daemon). I'll be interested to see if the 'rough unscientific benchmark' numbers can reach the chez levels and to see some more scientific benchmarks (I've been trying to get the r7 repo to build to run some personal benchmarks, but ha…

Note that the Chez startup time isn't that good, and even the current Racket startup time is not great (node is still maybe 5x faster to start up). We'd really like to improve this as well, but it's hard if you don't want to have your whole standard library linked into the binary.
Post reply on HN