The FAQ says:
> SCM, free by anonymous ftp from altdorf.ai.mit.edu:archive/scm or
> nexus.yorku.ca:pub/oz/scheme/new. Current version 4a12. Runs on Amiga,
> IBM PC, VMS, Macintosh, Unix, and similar systems.
but I can't find a Mac implementation. Anyone know how to get it -- or if it
exists. Failing that, who knows a good scheme-for-the-Mac.
Thanks
In article <····················@st-andrews.ac.uk> ··@dcs.st-and.ac.uk (Tony Davie) writes:
>The FAQ says:
>
>> SCM, free by anonymous ftp from altdorf.ai.mit.edu:archive/scm or
>> nexus.yorku.ca:pub/oz/scheme/new. Current version 4a12. Runs on Amiga,
>> IBM PC, VMS, Macintosh, Unix, and similar systems.
>
>but I can't find a Mac implementation. Anyone know how to get it -- or if it
>exists. Failing that, who knows a good scheme-for-the-Mac.
There is Gambit Scheme, which is available by ftp from
sumex-aim.stanford.edu in /info-mac/lang with a name beginning with
gambit.
If you are into paying $ for software, MacScheme express for $39 is
also pretty good.
I haven't tried SCM, so I cannot say anything about it.
--Haydn
--
*****************************************************
* Haydn Huntley ·······@silver.ucs.indiana.edu *
*****************************************************
>>>>> On 8 Dec 92 15:06:54 GMT, ··@dcs.st-and.ac.uk (Tony Davie) said:
Tony> The FAQ says:
> SCM, free by anonymous ftp from altdorf.ai.mit.edu:archive/scm or
> nexus.yorku.ca:pub/oz/scheme/new. Current version 4a12. Runs on Amiga,
> IBM PC, VMS, Macintosh, Unix, and similar systems.
Tony> but I can't find a Mac implementation. Anyone know how to get it
Tony> -- or if it exists. Failing that, who knows a good
Tony> scheme-for-the-Mac.
Like for all the computers mentioned, you have to compile it yourself.
The resulting user interface leaves something to be desired, though.
Simple scheme implementations like scm with just a simple line
oriented interface are only fun to use on operating systems like unix
where you can use good editors like emacs for a front end. Get the
Student Edition of MacScheme instead. It's only the price of the book
it comes in, worth every penny.
- Harald
Harald Hanche-Olsen writes:
... Get the
Student Edition of MacScheme instead. It's only the price of the book
it comes in, worth every penny.
Indeed, I completely agree. [I even bought two copies, one for the
office, and one for home ;-)]
Does anyone know if the book + the code will be updated to reflect
the latest revised report?
oz
---
In seeking the unattainable, simplicity | ···········@sis.yorku.ca
only gets in the way. -- Alan J. Perlis | ph:[416] 736 2100 x33976
In article <···················@ptolemy.ams.sunysb.edu>
······@ams.sunysb.edu (Harald Hanche-Olsen) writes:
>Simple scheme implementations like scm with just a simple line
>oriented interface are only fun to use on operating systems like unix
>where you can use good editors like emacs for a front end.
I'm really thankful to all of the free Lisp and Scheme
implementors out there, but I want to put in a plug for adding a
command line editing/history mechanism to these programs. If I
were a real C programmer, and had time, I suppose I'd do it
myself. (Hmm--Maybe I'll try to do a portable one in Lisp some
time. I suppose I know enough to do this. Now, if I only had
more time...:-) Anyway, it would be a really nice feature
for those of us who use Lisps in operating systems like MSDOS. I
can get by pretty well at this point just typing things in and
backspacing back to typos--I've been playing with Lisp long
enough that my mental parentheses-matcher is fairly accurate.
But being able to edit and go back to prior entries is handier.
This is especially true for people starting out with Lisp. Not
having a history mechanism (or an editor interface such as Gnu
Emacs (or GW-BASIC, for that matter)) negates a lot of the
benefits to novices of using an interpreted language. But anyone
who's not an expert probably wants to experiment by typing in
this or that at some point. Probably gurus need to do this
sometimes, too, at least to make quick changes to variables. And
it's just so much easier if you can recall and edit past lines.
(The history mechanism is one of my favorite things about the
one commercial product I've got, Star Sapphire Common Lisp.)
So how about it, implementors? I know it's extra work, but if
you're doing enhancements anyway, I suggest that this ought to be
fairly high on your list.
(Xlisp-Plus 2.1 does allow you to use DOS command line
facilities. So if you've got something set up in DOS to give you
history/editing, you get it for free in Xlisp-Plus. It's nice.
(Thanks, Tom Almy.) The drawback is that DOS gets to see the
keystrokes before Xlisp does, and then a Ctrl-C aborts Xlisp
rather than just your Lisp form. It's also possible to use small
Lisps within the Epsilon editor, which I've done sometimes with
Xlisp, XScheme, and SCM (I think), but it's messy. The Lisp often
gets confused about what you've typed in. You think you've
entered a final paren, but between Epsilon and Lisp, it never got
there.)
Anyway, thanks again to free Lisp implementors, whether your
Lisps have history mechanism or not.
Marshall Abrams
····@midway.uchicago.edu
(BTW, I am aware of the +, ++, +++ abbreviations, but this isn't
From: George J. Carrette
Subject: Re: Want history/command editing facilities in free Lisps
Date:
Message-ID: <4068@mitech.com>
In article <······················@midway.uchicago.edu>, ····@quads.uchicago.edu (Marshall Abrams) writes:
> I'm really thankful to all of the free Lisp and Scheme
> implementors out there, but I want to put in a plug for adding a
> command line editing/history mechanism to these programs. If I
> were a real C programmer, and had time, I suppose I'd do it
> myself.
You don't need to create any new program. The GNU software has a subroutine
library for adding command-line editing.
On the other hand, it is not unusual to find that command line
editors (and/or fancy rubout handlers) are in fact LARGER than
otherwise complete LISP implementations like SIOD.
Everything has its cost.
-gjc
> I'm really thankful to all of the free Lisp and Scheme
> implementors out there, but I want to put in a plug for adding a
> command line editing/history mechanism to these programs. If I
> were a real C programmer, and had time, I suppose I'd do it myself.
While we're at it-- how about symbol completion? How many times have
you typed "call-with-current-continuation" in an interactive Scheme
session *without* making a typo? (Not to mention the function
"empty-list-is-false-for-backward-compatibility" that is provided
by Elk 2.0a).
Symbol completion should be easy to implement on UNIX systems that
support a user-defined end-of-line character (like the tty interface
of 4.3 BSD and the "termio" interface do).
--
Oliver Laumann ···@cs.tu-berlin.de ···@tub.UUCP ···@tub.BITNET
M. Abrams and Oliver Laumann suggest:
MA> I'm really thankful to all of the free Lisp and Scheme
MA> implementors out there, but I want to put in a plug for adding a
MA> command line editing/history mechanism to these programs. If I
MA> were a real C programmer, and had time, I suppose I'd do it myself.
OL> While we're at it-- how about symbol completion? How many times have
OL> you typed "call-with-current-continuation" in an interactive Scheme
OL> session *without* making a typo?
Both can be accomplished by using the GNU readline library. That's the way
I did it for CLISP. The interface to that library is very simple to write,
some 30 lines of C code. The only restriction is that your program must be
covered by the GNU CopyLeft.
A completion utility in Common Lisp is available from
ifi.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de:/pub/xit/cl-utilities/completion.lisp .
B. Haible
······@ma2s2.mathematik.uni-karlsruhe.de
Free software is out there today to put a nice full-bore GUI
on Scheme. SUIT (from u of virginia) runs on DOS/windows/mac/X.
There are other platform-independent toolkits, too.
I wrote a C object system which accidentally turned out to be
great for adding C extensions to Scheme. You don't have to write
any interface glue for your extension; one interface to the
object library is all it takes. It runs under SCM, Elk, & Scheme->C.
--
Lance Norskog
Data is not information is not knowledge is not wisdom.
From: Piercarlo Grandi
Subject: Re: Want history/command editing facilities in free Lisps
Date:
Message-ID: <PCG.92Dec20215318@decb.aber.ac.uk>
On 15 Dec 92 10:49:06 GMT, ···@mitech.com (George J. Carrette) said:
gjc> (Marshall Abrams) writes:
abrams> I'm really thankful to all of the free Lisp and Scheme
abrams> implementors out there, but I want to put in a plug for adding a
abrams> command line editing/history mechanism to these programs. If I
abrams> were a real C programmer, and had time, I suppose I'd do it
abrams> myself.
gjc> You don't need to create any new program. The GNU software has a
gjc> subroutine library for adding command-line editing.
Nooooo! Don't! Don't use GNU readline! It will take over your 16
processor Cray Y-MP only to fo line editing!
The editline library has been posted to comp.sources, works well, is a
drop in replacement for readline, and is about ten times smaller
withoput losing any essential functionality.
Moreover the schemish approach is not to link in the line editing
library at all, if yoiu can help it; use a history front end, or a
history line discipline. There are quite a few history front ends; for
example the Reactive Keyboard. Screen 3.x can also be used as a history
front end. They work for all programs, for all situations.
gjc> On the other hand, it is not unusual to find that command line
gjc> editors (and/or fancy rubout handlers) are in fact LARGER than
gjc> otherwise complete LISP implementations like SIOD.
'editline' was worked upon by Rich $alz; he is almost a minimalist.
gjc> Everything has its cost.
Eventually we will see 'size gsync' print: '463872+89088+125952'
or 'wc -l gsync.man' print '786'... :-) (GNU sync joke original
due to Alec Muffett, hi!)
--
Piercarlo Grandi, Dept of CS, ·····@Aberystwyth <···@aber.ac.uk>
E l'italiano cantava, cantava. E le sue disperate invocazioni giunsero
alle orecchie del suo divino protettore, il dio della barzelletta
····@quads.uchicago.edu (Marshall Abrams) writes:
> I'm really thankful to all of the free Lisp and Scheme implementors
> out there, but I want to put in a plug for adding a command line
> editing/history mechanism to these programs. If I were a real C
> programmer, and had time, I suppose I'd do it myself. (Hmm--Maybe
It's already been done for you: the GNU readline library. Just plug
it in and play.
--
Brent Benson
Harris Computer Systems
In article <···················@amber.ssd.csd.harris.com> ·····@ssd.csd.harris.com (Brent Benson) writes:
····@quads.uchicago.edu (Marshall Abrams) writes:
> I'm really thankful to all of the free Lisp and Scheme implementors
> out there, but I want to put in a plug for adding a command line
> editing/history mechanism to these programs. If I were a real C
> programmer, and had time, I suppose I'd do it myself. (Hmm--Maybe
It's already been done for you: the GNU readline library. Just plug
it in and play.
The CMULisp package for emacs is nice too, or just running Scheme
inside a CMU shell.
From: Tom Almy
Subject: Re: Want history/command editing facilities in free Lisps
Date:
Message-ID: <13047@sail.LABS.TEK.COM>
In article <······················@midway.uchicago.edu> ····@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>(Xlisp-Plus 2.1 does allow you to use DOS command line
>facilities. So if you've got something set up in DOS to give you
>history/editing, you get it for free in Xlisp-Plus. It's nice.
>(Thanks, Tom Almy.)
You're welcome!
>It's also possible to use small
>Lisps within the Epsilon editor, which I've done sometimes with
>Xlisp, XScheme, and SCM (I think), but it's messy. The Lisp often
>gets confused about what you've typed in.
I've never lost keystrokes, but command line editing doesn't work properly
unless you set *dos-input* non-nil. You can also use the 80386 protected mode
compiled Xlisp in the process window, you aren't limited to the real mode
version.
--
Tom Almy
····@sail.labs.tek.com
Standard Disclaimers Apply