Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "IronScheme" in English language version.
Unfortunately, my DLR branch is very out of sync with the Silverlight one. I just thought about it, perhaps I do not need the DLR perse, will investigate. The problem is that the DLR as-is, is not good enough to support the majority of the Scheme's requirements[permanent dead link]
To make IronScheme use the current DLR, I would loose [sic] quite a few language requirements and important features, namely tail calls, and runtime record generation. Both these are not (and probably will never) be supported by the DLR, due to Silverlight compatibility requirements. Currently, IronScheme only lacks reifiable continuations to be 100% RnRS conforming. One could make IronScheme use the current DLR, but then it would not be Scheme anymore, as tail calls are extremely important (and required).[permanent dead link]
At the moment I only utilize about 15% of the DLR, and I would love to get rid of it eventually. The path they have chosen to do Python dynamically is too slow, and it lacks features that used to be present in the DLR (the new 'dynamic' features makes compilation to an assembly impossible). There are other features too that I had to build in, like tail calls and direct methods calls, that is also impossible in the latest DLR.
At the moment I only utilize about 15% of the DLR, and I would love to get rid of it eventually. The path they have chosen to do Python dynamically is too slow, and it lacks features that used to be present in the DLR (the new 'dynamic' features makes compilation to an assembly impossible). There are other features too that I had to build in, like tail calls and direct methods calls, that is also impossible in the latest DLR.
