[gambit-list] Namespaces

Guillaume Cartier gcartier at jazzscheme.org
Tue Feb 12 11:41:37 EST 2008


> ...
>
> I got my code to work and I think I understand the ##namespace mechanism
> much better.  Now my concern is that if I'm building an application (my
> ultimate goal) am I going to have to re-work everything once a module
> system gets implemented.  I really like how fast Gambit development
> happens: it's already enabled me to implement things I expected to be
> there, simply by voicing it to the newgroup.  I also know that Gambit
> has some good advantages over most other implementations.
>
> However, being a limited-time "spare-time" programmer, is my time to
> learn things better spent on another implementation with slower
> development and more stable (as in "probably not going to be
> reimplemented in such a way that you would have to change large portions
> of code") features?  Is Gambit meant for building applications, or is it
> meant as a testing ground for features of a scheme implementation?

Hi Joel,

This part of your message caught my attention. From everything I have
seen over the years, Gambit is really meant for building real
applications. I have seen many people using it for developing
sophisticated software. Personnaly, my company is in the process of
porting some commercial applications we developed to Gambit. It has
exactly what we need. Blazzing speed, stabilitity, great core
functionality and a very nice debugger.

Hope this help,

Best regards,

Guillaume Cartier



More information about the Gambit-list mailing list