Re: [Chicken-users] chicken-hosted stalin

[John Cowan]

felix winkelmann scripsit:

> Even though the [chicken-stalin] compiler is even slower than the
> original one, it compiles (the compiler itself) faster [...].

This is indecipherable.  The purpose of a compiler is to compile; if
chicken-stalin compiles the Stalin source code faster than native stalin
does, in what sense is it also slower?  And if chicken-stalin *is* slower,
what is the point of compiling Stalin with csc, since a program that
is inherently as slow as Stalin should presumably be compiled with the
compiler that produces the fastest executables, viz. native stalin?

Also, I'm not clear how much use Stalin is in the Chicken environment,
given its severe restrictions on input language.  If Stalin could
be front-ended with an R5RS macro expander, and if enough bootstrap
procedures could be provided that it could understand a larger fraction of
Chicken Scheme, then it would indeed be useful to have as an alternative
compiler.

> http://chicken.wiki.br/stalin

The link to the Stalin manual is to "stalin1html", which is broken.  Plausible
alternatives like "stalin.1.html", "stalin1.html", "stalin.1", and "stalin1"
also don't work.

-- 
Clear?  Huh!  Why a four-year-old child         John Cowan
could understand this report.  Run out          address@hidden
and find me a four-year-old child.  I           http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
can't make head or tail out of it.
        --Rufus T. Firefly on government reports