[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: scsh in PLT Scheme?
On Mar 26, Paul Steckler wrote:
>
> So before we embark on that course, let me poll the PLT audience:
BTW, I had some code at some point when I wanted to get some stuff
easier. That was when I re-hacked the subprocess thing. Most of it
was around starting processes, piping etc. One thing I had was the
ability to get return value from both subprocesses and Scheme threads,
and then you could pipeline any mixtures of them together. I think
that a lot of that stuff can still be recycled.
> - do you currently use scsh?
No, but I use MzScheme extensively for scripts.
> - would you find scsh-under-PLT-Scheme useful?
Definitely.
> - would you use a PLT scsh-oid that implemented some, but not all
> of scsh?
Yeah -- when I went over that I got the distinct impression that being
100% compatible should not be the main goal -- the main thing would be
to have an equivalent functionality available.
> Bypassing the scsh C code would mean that low-level Unix features
> would not be available. For instance, the terminal support in scsh
> would be missing in such a port.
Wouldn't it be possible to write a minimal C extension that would
expose just a few important primitives?
> Here's what would be missing:
>
> - low-level socket stuff (Ch. 4)
> - Scheme 48 threads, Unix signals (Ch. 9)
> - system log stuff (Ch. 10)
>
> MzScheme already has its own thread system, and makes sockets
> available as Scheme ports via a high-level API.
>
> How would you feel about this kind of (semi-)port of scsh?
I'd be very happy with it.
--
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://www.barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!