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

GNU Guile 2.0.9 released

lists.gnu.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–18 of 18 posts

Re: GNU Guile 2.0.9 released

#11

Post by outworlder »

frozenport wrote: post #10
13b9f227ecf0 wrote: post #8

Anybody have comments on Guile vs. V8 for embedding purposes? Performance? API quality?

One of my favorite simulators, Meep ( http://ab-initio.mit.edu/wiki/index.php/Meep ) uses Guile as a control interface. From my experience using Guile presents an unnecessary obstacle to even the most brightest programmers. I frequently see bash scripts writing HERE scheme files because for loops are too difficult in scheme.

> I frequently see bash scripts writing HERE scheme files because for loops are too difficult in scheme.

Why? Loops in general are quite easy to do in Scheme, specially the "for-each" variety.

"The most brightest programmers", if bothered by the lack of a C-like for construct, would be able to fix that, for them and for others, in 5 minutes with a macro.

Scheme is easy and incredibly powerful. Its only issue is that knowledge in other languages does not necessarily translate directly to it. In other words, you have to take some time to learn, which is not a good thing nowadays with the instant gratification culture.

Re: GNU Guile 2.0.9 released

#13

Post by davexunit »

frozenport wrote: post #10
13b9f227ecf0 wrote: post #8

Anybody have comments on Guile vs. V8 for embedding purposes? Performance? API quality?

One of my favorite simulators, Meep ( http://ab-initio.mit.edu/wiki/index.php/Meep ) uses Guile as a control interface. From my experience using Guile presents an unnecessary obstacle to even the most brightest programmers. I frequently see bash scripts writing HERE scheme files because for loops are too difficult in scheme.

>for loops are too difficult

for-each? http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/manual/html_node/SRFI_002d...

or how about a named let?

  (let loop ((i 0))
    (if (
or how about using SRFI 42?

  (use-modules (srfi srfi-42))
  (do-ec (: i 10) (display "hello\n"))
http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-42/srfi-42.html

Re: GNU Guile 2.0.9 released

#15

Post by davexunit »

caycep wrote: post #12

a nicer way to run SICP examples than mit-scheme?

Here's a handy article about Scheme implementations written by the Guile co-maintainer. Look for the heading "The Scheme for SICP".

http://wingolog.org/archives/2013/01/07/an-opinionated-guide...

tl;dr - he recommends the SICP mode for Racket.

Re: GNU Guile 2.0.9 released

#16

Post by bitwize »

frozenport wrote: post #10
13b9f227ecf0 wrote: post #8

Anybody have comments on Guile vs. V8 for embedding purposes? Performance? API quality?

One of my favorite simulators, Meep ( http://ab-initio.mit.edu/wiki/index.php/Meep ) uses Guile as a control interface. From my experience using Guile presents an unnecessary obstacle to even the most brightest programmers. I frequently see bash scripts writing HERE scheme files because for loops are too difficult in scheme.

    for(i=0;i
in Scheme becomes:

    (do ((i 0 (+ i 1)))
        ((>= i max))
        ...)
In general:

    for(VAR=INITIALIZER;CONDITION;VAR=INCREMENT)
    {
       BODY
    }
    return RETVAL;
becomes:

    (do ((VAR INITIALIZER INCREMENT))
        ((not CONDITION) RETVAL)
       BODY)
in Scheme.

It's a pretty trivial transformation -- not hard at all. I think these "most brightest" programmers just didn't want to learn the freakin' language.

Re: GNU Guile 2.0.9 released

#17

Post by frozenport »

outworlder wrote: post #11
frozenport wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of my favorite simulators, Meep ( http://ab-initio.mit.edu/wiki/index.php/Meep ) uses Guile as a control interface. From my experience using Guile presents an unnecessary obstacle to even the most brightest programmers. I frequently see bash scripts writing HERE scheme files because for loops are too difficult in scheme.

> I frequently see bash scripts writing HERE scheme files because for loops are too difficult in scheme. Why? Loops in general are quite easy to do in Scheme, specially the "for-each" variety. "The most brightest programmers", if bothered by the lack of a C-like for construct, would be able to fix that, for them and for others, in 5 minutes with a macro. Scheme is easy and incredibly powerful. Its only issue is that…

Scheme certainly isn't hard, but given a choice between working on their codes or using a dirty hack to get on with their lives. Everybody I know choose to get on with their lives. A python interface would have been better.

Re: GNU Guile 2.0.9 released

#18

Post by omaranto »

For me the best feature of the 2.0.9 release is that the documentation builds again! I tried compiling 2.0.7 and got some weird errors from texinfo. I couldn't figure out how to fix them quickly so I just installed without documentation. But 2.0.9 builds fine, including documentation, on my system.
Post reply on HN