I was thinking about pointing out that tutorial.

Until I went through it, I'd mostly just played with Haskell for Project Euler and other small problems. That tutorial really helped get the feel for larger projects in the language.

But at the same time, it shows off some of the elegance of lisp. It's simple enough that you can implement it as a beginner tutorial, but the end result is a surprisingly solid language.

One of the beauties of lisp is how much is possible just from some simple building blocks. That tutorial did an excellent job displaying it from the side of a language implementer rather than a language user.

Thanks a ton for it, it was really a pleasure to use.

Thanks a bunch for that tutorial! It demystified language implementation and taught me a little Haskell along the way. Oh and showed me the beauty of parser combinators.

(I didn't run very far with it but here's my code if anyone is curious: https://github.com/samsonjs/elschemo/blob/master/lisp.hs)

I remember seeing your tutorial before and thinking it looked like a great exercise. Do you think it would be worthwhile for someone with a moderate Haskell background who wants to learn some Scheme? Or is it best to go into it the other way round?

I think it might be quicker to read some Scheme programs to get a feel for the language. It's usually harder to understand exactly what a program is doing by looking at the source code than it is to look at the output of the program and figure out how it got there. (This is also why I always ask for demos and changelist descriptions that explain the intent of the change when I do code reviews at work.)

Some time, it might be fun to write a Haskell interpreter in Scheme. :-) There're all sorts of cool challenges involving type inference there.