|Re: [Sawfish] ... upcoming releases / maintainership|
[ Thread Index |
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/sawfish Archives
Yesterday, Campbell Barton wrote:
> after the racket interview on floss weekly I briefly looked at
> embedding racket in an application, just checked how feasible it was
> compared to python3, according to one of the devs the runtime is
> ~5mb or so. (iirc py lib is under 1mb),
Racket is certainly not a minimal thing -- it has a lot of
functionality in its VM, which adds up to a large binary. If you want
numbers, then currently the sizes of the executable (on a build that
does not split it to multiple .so files) is:
cgc 2.2mb 2.5mb
3m 2.8mb 3.5mb
where "cgc" is an executable that uses the boehm conservative gc, and
3m uses a precise gc.
> for sawfish something minimal like tiny-scheme probably is a better
For the record, there are other minimal schemes around that are way
better than tiny-scheme. Tiny scheme is an extremely minimal
implementation that is regarded as a very bad implementation in most
scheme circles. Using it for sawfish would be a mistake IMO, and not
a step forward from librep.
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!