Re: How to classify Scheme implementations on Scheme.org Lassi Kortela 14 Feb 2021 09:34 UTC
> What are your thoughts about this? Coverage is a good start but even with the same feature set there's a big difference between an advanced native compiler like Gambit and a slow interpreter like Chibi. There are also important features like threads and portability that fall outside the standard. It's hard to write useful programs using only RnRS features, so people use SRFIs and other libraries a lot. I would guess that it's useful to divide implementations into two or three groups. A more detailed ranking is likely to change as implementations add features, making it hard to keep up to date, and may lead to implementers competing and micro-optimizing for specific features to get a better ranking. If there are only a few clear criteria for dividing into groups, it's also easier for newcomers to understand. The presence of a native code compiler is one pretty clear dividing line, as is multi-threading. The more detailed scores you suggest can also be useful for experienced schemers. https://ecraven.github.io/r7rs-coverage/ is probably the best current example of such a table (source at https://github.com/ecraven/r7rs-coverage). Happily, RnRS conformance testing can be automated to a large degree.