[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