[plt-scheme] only 2 simple questions

From: Steven H. Rogers (steve at shrogers.com)
Date: Mon Jan 23 08:15:29 EST 2006

Good points, Noel.  They go a long way toward explaining the relative 
scarcity of well known industrial Scheme applications.  Chance plays a role 
as well.

Noel Welsh wrote:
> --- "David T. Pierson" <dtp at mindstory.com> wrote:
>> Am I just dreaming if I think industry usage of Scheme is
>> restricted more by lack of awareness rather than lack of
> practical applications? (where "awareness" includes exposure,
> education, experience, etc.)
> I agree, but there are two caveats:
> 1. If you're going to use Scheme in industry you're
> probably going to have to write a lot of libraries that
> more widely used languages already have (this is the
> 'Pioneer Tax'; clearly the tax decreases over time).  Many
> people don't see this tax as worth paying.
A project which only needs a limited range of libraries has more 
flexibility.  Sometimes a single library or application will give a language 
a boost, e.g. "Ruby on Rails" recently.
> 2. If you're not working for yourself you often don't get
> to choose your language.
But sometimes you do.  Changing languages for an established project is 
difficult, but a "new and different" language may be introduced for new 
project, particularly if the project has a small number of developers.  If 
you do start a project in Scheme, once it becomes larger and more visible 
there's likely to be pressure to use something more "standard", but may not 
be enough to overcome the momentum of the project.
> Both issues hinder bootstrapping of industry applications
> of Scheme.
> Cheers,
> Noel
> Email: noelwelsh <at> yahoo <dot> com   noel <at> untyped <dot> com
> AIM: noelhwelsh
> Blogs: http://monospaced.blogspot.com/  http://www.untyped.com/untyping/
Steven H. Rogers, Ph.D., steve at shrogers.com
Weblog: http://shrogers.com/weblog
"He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense."
-- John McCarthy

Posted on the users mailing list.