2 ms·
First, there are many different Scheme implementations and they differ significantly. The standard is small and SRFIs not always sufficient, so implementations
by klibertp 10y ago
First, there are many different Scheme implementations and they differ significantly. The standard is small and SRFIs not always sufficient, so implementations invent their own extensions. There is some review of available options here: https://wingolog.org/archives/2013/01/07/an-opinionated-guide-to-scheme-implementations https://wingolog.org/archives/2013/01/07/an-opinionated-guid...
Personally, I use Chicken Scheme for command-line utils (thanks to AOT compilation Chicken Scheme programs start-up time is much shorter) and Racket for GUI programs. Both implementations offer stability, ongoing development and a package ecosystem which has most of the things I need. They also provide extensive tooling, with Racket going as far as providing an IDE and visual debugger.
Most of the problems you'd have when replacing PERL or Ruby with a Scheme would have to do with library/package availability. If your use-case doesn't require a library which your Scheme lacks it may be a suitable replacement for PERL, Ruby, Python or JavaScript (node).