As a developer, I definitely see PLT Scheme as a large language. To me everything in the PLT Scheme Reference Manual is part of the PLT Scheme language. Even if you restrict it to the #lang scheme subset, I'd still consider it large. How many other languages include: an sophisticated macro system, a rich numeric stack (including exactness, infinities, complex numbers, etc), classes, modules, units, contracts, pattern matching, multiple values, exceptions, continuations, concurrency, namespaces, custodians, and I'm bound to be missing features in that list. That's a large language. The libraries are on top of that.<br> <br>PLT Scheme is a large, rich language (or implementation, if you prefer).<br><br>Another 1cent for good measure.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Matthias Felleisen <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:matthias@ccs.neu.edu">matthias@ccs.neu.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="im"><br> On Aug 21, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Karl Winterling wrote:<br> <br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> PLT is not really a ``large'' language.<br> </blockquote> <br></div> You're absolutely correct, it isn't. So now re-read what they wrote from that angle :-)_________________________________________________<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br> For list-related administrative tasks:<br> <a href="http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme" target="_blank">http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme</a><br> </div></div></blockquote></div><br>