Scheme as a virtual machine?

[namekuseijin]

On 13 out, 21:01, Ertugrul Söylemez <e... at ertes.de> wrote:
> What exactly is "friggin' huge" and "complex" about Haskell, and what's
> this stuff about a "very own monolithic gcc"?  Haskell isn't a lot more
> complex than Scheme.  In fact, Python is much more complex.  Reduced to
> bare metal (i.e. leaving out syntactic sugar) Haskell is one of the
> simplest languages.

yeah, like scheme, it's essentially evaluation of lambda expressions.
Unlike scheme, it's got a huge plethora of syntatic sugar as big and
complex as a full numeric tower.  Such is the fear to avoid
parentheses at all costs that they allowed lots of perlisms into the
language ($ . `` >>= etc) plus python's significant whitespace.  So,
in practice, even though at the core it's as simple as scheme's core,
at practice it's so mindnumbing complex that only one implementation
is worth of note.  And one as complex and scary beast as gcc... that's
the cost of a very irregular syntax...