From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "John W. Eaton" Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: language translator help Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 09:44:43 -0500 Sender: guile-user-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <15564.2779.160181.771894@segfault.bogus.domain> References: <15561.38014.967466.255795@segfault.bogus.domain> <15563.18078.788420.299836@segfault.bogus.domain> <87ofg4zkhp.fsf@becket.becket.net> <15563.20791.582352.214985@segfault.bogus.domain> <87k7qszi7t.fsf@becket.becket.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1020005244 5724 127.0.0.1 (28 Apr 2002 14:47:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 14:47:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-user Return-path: Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 171pxT-0001UC-00 for ; Sun, 28 Apr 2002 16:47:23 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 171pvX-0003qr-00; Sun, 28 Apr 2002 10:45:23 -0400 Original-Received: from bevo.che.wisc.edu ([128.104.177.141]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 171pv6-0003nj-00 for ; Sun, 28 Apr 2002 10:44:56 -0400 Original-Received: from segfault.bogus.domain (12-221-96-229.client.insightBB.com [12.221.96.229]) by bevo.che.wisc.edu (8.12.1/8.12.1/Debian -5) with ESMTP id g3SEijZo029106; Sun, 28 Apr 2002 09:44:45 -0500 Original-Received: from segfault.bogus.domain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by segfault.bogus.domain (8.12.2/8.12.2/Debian -5) with ESMTP id g3SEiicv008198; Sun, 28 Apr 2002 09:44:44 -0500 Original-Received: (from jwe@localhost) by segfault.bogus.domain (8.12.2/8.12.2/Debian -5) id g3SEih07008195; Sun, 28 Apr 2002 09:44:43 -0500 Original-To: tb@becket.net (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) In-Reply-To: <87k7qszi7t.fsf@becket.becket.net> X-Mailer: VM 7.04 under Emacs 20.7.2 Errors-To: guile-user-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:345 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.user:345 On 27-Apr-2002, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: | "John W. Eaton" writes: | | > So, if there are significant bits of the run-time library that will | > be written in C/C++/Fortran, does it make a big difference if some | > of the parser is also written in C/C++? | | Python also has an extensive library. I think the best way to deal is | to make the features of that library available to Guile: as ordinary | Guile extensions. Then write wrappers for them. Sure. But this doesn't really answer my question. If the wrapper for the library and the library itself are written in C, then that is something that must be compiled before it can be used with Guile, and may need to be ported if it contains platform-dependent bits. So if you already have that dependency on compiled C code, why is it important that the parser/translator be written in Scheme instead of C? jwe _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user