Skip to main content

Scheme!

I had a buddy ask me about learning the Scheme programming language... so I figured I'd write a blog post about it!

First a very short history.
A long time ago (in 1958) there was born a language called Lisp.  Lisp is actually the second oldest high level language but that's a different post.  Lisp split into two main branches Common Lisp and Scheme.
Common Lisp is quite large and has lots of features including a full OO system.  Scheme on the other hand is as stripped down as is practical.  For comparison the Common Lisp spec has ~1100 pages while the Scheme R5RS spec has 50 pages.

That being said Scheme has low level primitives which allow you to build high level primitives.
There are lots of great resources out there for learning Scheme and I'm going to list a few here.

Textbooks:



Free textbooks:

Websites:
As for implementations (of which there are many) I think I must recommend either racket or guile.  Racket is a very full featured Scheme including many libraries and a GUI environment where as guile is a smaller scheme used in the Gnome project.

As always the best way to learn a language is to use it.  Scheme is quite a bit different than your standard imperative languages but once your learn it you will have yet another tool in your programming toolbox.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Duck typing considered harmful.

I've had a chance to work on a fairly large chunk of Python at this point and have decided that Python (like Perl) is completely untenable at scale.  <rant><rave><drool>  but wait!  I have reasons! Programmers spend most of their time reading code.  We read massive amounts of code.  After we read massive amounts of code we write one... or change one... To make a change to a piece of code you first have to understand what it does and how it interacts with the system around it.  Then we start reading massive amounts of code again.  Anything you can do to minimize the amount of code a programmer has to understand to make a change becomes a huge gain in productivity. Duck typing causes the amount of code you need to read to make a change to grow very large. For example lets look at two functions, one in C++ and one in Python. First in C++ int function(type1 arg1, type2 arg2) {   return arg1->method(arg2); } In this fun...
1 comment
Read more

Microprocessor Architectures in the top500 list.

The  top500 list has been swamped by x86 machines over the last several years.  Anyone who knows me is aware that I am NO fan of the x86 ISA. Somewhat heartening is that the most recent list seen a resurgence in other architectures.  The Power architecture from IBM has been a fixture on the list for a long and is still a strong contender even though it has fallen to No. 12 from No. 9 last time and No. 1 in November of 2007. A Sparc machine has captured the No. 1 place this year and is actually as powerful as the the No. 2 through No. 6 systems combined. The Chinese MIPS based Loongson processor is starting to make some noise and the Dawning 6000 is reported to eventually reach a Petaflop in computing power. One other note is that an increasing number of machines in the top500 list rely heavily on GPUs.  The No. 2 machine on the current list, the Chinese Tianhe-1a machine, is comprised of 14,336 Intel Xeon processors and 7,168 Nvidia Tesla GPUs. Now ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Staking Claims: A History of Programming Language Design Claims and Evidence

Found on  Lambda the Ultimate  ( a great programming languages blog btw ) A great article  on programming languages through history and the truth of their claims. From the article: While still a relatively young field, computer science has a vast body of knowledge in the domain of programming languages. When a new language is introduced, its designers make claims which distinguish their language from previous languages. However, it often feels like language designers do not feel a pressing need to back these claims with evidence beyond personal anecdotes. Peer reviewers are likely to agree. In this paper, we present preliminary work which revisits the history of such claims by examining a number of language design papers which span the history of programming language development. We focus on the issue of claim-evidence correspondence, or determining how often claims are or are not backed by evidence. These preliminary results confirm that unsupported claims have been ...
Post a Comment
Read more