A bit of reading while thinking about qualified names and namespaces. Stuff I noticed. Chicken Scheme has a problem with running out of stack space too. There is a nice language named Nim under development, glancing through it, it seems to mostly be an Algol like derivation. But fast and bootstrapped, I like it. Haskell allocates large objects in chunks to keep GC happy. If you compile to straightforward C it's actually quite difficult to keep the GC manager happy due to the fact that at any moment the C routine might ask for memory, which might trigger a collection, and ruin all invariants in the C routine. Using C reference counting completely avoids that problem. (Or you use bytecode, as in Clean, OCaml and Java, and avoid the problem by keeping the complete machine abstract.)
There is a small but major design decision in the Ast representation. Lists or vectors? Lists allow for sharing and a declarative style, vectors might be faster but at the expense of ugly imperative code and copying. After some dabbling I threw up a coin and decided vectors.
I continue with my streak of shooting myself in the foot and am going to implement namespaces no matter what. Though it's academically uninteresting and pretty annoying to get right algorithmically.
I am leaning towards dropping the combinator rewriting system... (But what about OS's where the stack size is a hard limit? No MacOS?).
Eager. Pure. No GC. No combinator rewriting. HM inference. No bootstrapping. No cyclic structures. C semantics. It'll be completely academically uninteresting. But hopefully a great small tool for patching small functional programs. A front-end to LLVM.
(As a side note: Because of the end of Moore's law I expect the next thing to be vertical integration which means Hardware OS's; or since OS's are written in C/C++, language integration. All current research paywalled, unfortunately.)