[gambit-list] DrScheme and GambitC
Alex Sandro Queiroz e Silva
asandroq at gmail.com
Tue Sep 2 09:34:09 EDT 2008
Hallo,
William Cook wrote:
> The page you gave about quack didn't mention debugging,
> and gambit.el has very minimal support, as far as I can tell.
> My point is that these are not acceptable solutions,
> yet the fact that people think they count as a solution seems
> to prevent the creation of real solutions.
> Telling me that "I can create my own" is also not very
> helpful. I think that a language implementation is not
> complete without a good out-of-the-box development
> environment, which includes a good debugger. I stand by
> my assertion that there are no complete implementations of
> Scheme. And this is very unfortunate. I also admit being
> annoyed by this situation, but I'm not just complaining;
> I am trying to do something about it.
>
First of all, by all means, finish your plug-in. I never said
"stop this project!" or hinted in this direction. That will be a nice
addition to the Schemer toolbox, and I guess lots of Schemers would
switch to it once it's available.
My reply was prompted by the whining "It is sad that the Scheme
community... blah, blah, blah... Python, Ruby have it... blah blah." You
say that nor quack neither gambit.el have a debugger, but the REPL *is*
the debugger! You have backtraces, you can resume from an exception, you
can see the environment of any frame etc. It's all there, it's not just
behind shiny icons, it's in the REPL. If this does not suit you, fine,
you are doing something about it. My comment "add your own" was not
about writing a debugger, was about adding the desired fanciness to what
is already there. But I do not feel any less equipped than the
developers of any other language nor I think I should be sad.
Cheers,
-alex
http://www.ventonegro.org/
More information about the Gambit-list
mailing list