[plt-scheme] Python Too Dynamic?

Steve, we (PLT people) have been teaching the construction of Scheme 
interpreters in Scheme for, oh, about two decades now. So don't let 
those Pythonistas fool you in the Python in Python thingie. Every 
undergraduate from our courses knows how to do that.

In case, you meant the more complicated task of bootstrapping a Python 
self-hosting compiler, I'd be impressed.

Our failure to complete the Python implementation is not so much due to 
the problem of implementing the *langauge* but the *run-time 
libraries.* Unless we can provide all or at least most of the 
libraries, we're hosed because programmers don't like inconsistencies. 
So Daniel has designed three different ways of doing just that, and I 
believe his last one will work well, but he hasn't had much time 
recently.

The complaint about Python's dynamism is more related to the analysis 
of programs than the implementation. If you assume a lot of things, you 
can analyze Python of course just like any other language, and not give 
credit just like any other computer scientist.

-- Matthias



On Dec 29, 2004, at 4:49 PM, Steven H. Rogers wrote:

>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>  http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme
>
> Has the effort to include Python as a language choice for DrScheme 
> been abandoned?
>
> Posts such as this:
> http://list.cs.brown.edu/pipermail/plt-scheme/2004-January/004400.html
> indicate that it is a daunting task because of Python's extreme 
> dynamism.
>
> The PyPy project (http://codespeak.net/pypy/index.cgi?home) is 
> implementing Python in Python.  Given the experience of those involved 
> with Python in DrScheme, is this task hopeless, or might it be the 
> impetus for Python to "grow up"?
>
> Regards,
> Steve
> -- 
> Steven H. Rogers, Ph.D., steve at shrogers.com
> Weblog: http://shrogers.com/weblog
> "Don't worry about what anybody else is going to do. The best
> way to predict the future is to invent it." - Alan Kay
>