Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!texbell!swbatl!wuarchive!rice!news!rich
From: rich@Rice.edu (Carey Richard Murphey)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme
Subject: Re: what makes scheme?
Message-ID: <RICH.90Aug7015042@uncle-bens.Rice.edu>
Date: 7 Aug 90 06:50:42 GMT
References: <9008031618.AA02461@mailhost.samsung.com>
	<1990Aug5.175401@sprawl.yorku.ca>
Sender: news@rice.edu (News)
Reply-To: Rich Murphey <Rich@Rice.edu>
Organization: Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Rice
	University
Lines: 24
In-Reply-To: oz@sprawl.yorku.ca's message of 4 Aug 90 21:24:01 GMT

In article <1990Aug5.175401@sprawl.yorku.ca> oz@sprawl.yorku.ca (Ozan Yigit) writes:
]In article <9008031618.AA02461@mailhost.samsung.com>, gjc@mitech.COM writes:
]|> ... it is extremely important to have a straightforward interface to
]|> code written in C? ...

]What does this have anything to do with a complete/proper implementation
]of the language? 

]oz

Hm... after watching this thread for the last week, I've got a question.

Are there any other small, redistributable scheme interpreters written
in C which have a straightforward interface to code written in C?  To
be specific, are there any others better for the purpose of adding a
scheme subset as an extension language to small (1000 line) C language
programs.  Are there redistributable scheme interpreters which run on
both unix and *ms-dos*?

I'm curious to know what else is out there that's a minimal
implementation, easy to modify, port, interface with other C code, and
redistribute.  As a scheme novice, I am easily overwhelmed by the size
of elk and even Jason Coughlin's interpreter, and I wouldn't even
think about trying to port them to ms-dos.  Thanks!  Rich