<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1106" name=GENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=#ffffff> <DIV><FONT size=2>I am a novice at Scheme, first discovering DrScheme about 2 years ago.  Since then I have </FONT></DIV> <DIV>experimented with it on and off.  Prior to discovering Scheme I had experience programming</DIV> <DIV>in assembly, fortran, C, and taken college courses in Cobol and Ada.  Scheme immediately </DIV> <DIV>seemed to me to be the language that I wish I had been exposed to when I first started</DIV> <DIV>programming.  It seems so natural, even elegant to me.  It's syntax seems to fit my mind, or </DIV> <DIV>maybe thought process is a better word, better than any other language.  And recursion,</DIV> <DIV>which I had always had trouble implementing in C even though I understood the concept, suddenly</DIV> <DIV>seemed trivial.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=2>All this is in the way of leading up to my question.  As far as I can tell, Scheme isn't used much</FONT></DIV> <DIV>outside the academic community.  This despite the fact that it appears to be the introductory</DIV> <DIV>language for the two premier science and engineering colleges in the country, i.e. MIT and</DIV> <DIV>Cal Tech.  One would think that if the kind of student they have enrolled at these two institutions</DIV> <DIV>felt that Scheme was a useful language, it would be in wider use.  It's hard for me to understand</DIV> <DIV>why a person with a strong mathematics background wouldn't be attracted to Scheme.  It seems very intuitive from a mathematical perspective. I have been considering this question for awhile when I came across an article by Paul Graham, author of ANSI Common Lisp.  Of course, I know that Lisp and Scheme are related, and Lisp seems to suffer from the same lack of appreciation and use as Scheme.  Dr. Graham addressed this question as it relates to Lisp in an article he has posted at <A href="http://www.paulgraham.com/popular.html">http://www.paulgraham.com/popular.html</A> .  I</DIV> <DIV>assume that by way of their relationship, he would apply the same arguments to Scheme.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=2>The reason I am posting this question here is that I know that the language designers of DrScheme regularly read this forum and contribute to it, and can render an expert opionion on this question if they so</FONT></DIV> <DIV>choose.  Also, I have my own thought about something that would contribute to increasing the use</DIV> <DIV>of Scheme.  I wonder, in the universities where Scheme is being taught, how many of the departments</DIV> <DIV>other than Computer Science, are using Scheme for any of their work?  I am thinking particularly of</DIV> <DIV>Engineering, Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry, etc.  In other words, I would be interested in </DIV> <DIV>knowing why the designers of PLT Scheme can't convince more of their fellow professors to use</DIV> <DIV>Scheme for their applications?  This question should also be asked of Patrick Henry Winston of MIT's</DIV> <DIV>AI lab.  Why can't he convince more of his fellows to use Lisp?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=2>Regards,</FONT></DIV> <DIV>Jeff Stephens</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=2><FONT size=2>  </FONT></DIV> <DIV><BR></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>