State of CHICKEN 2021 survey results

Total of 72 submissions.

Use of CHICKEN

What CHICKEN version(s) do you use?

5.2.0	58	(80.56%)
4.13.0	12	(16.67%)
5.1.0	10	(13.89%)
Some revision from git	7	(9.72%)
No answer	3	(4.17%)

Other

master
C5 HEAD + patches

Where do you get CHICKEN from?

I build it myself from sources	49	(68.06%)
Package manager of my operating system	33	(45.83%)
No answer	2	(2.78%)

How long have you been using CHICKEN?

More than 10 years	15	(20.83%)
2 years to 3 years	10	(13.89%)
1 year to 2 years	8	(11.11%)
1 month to 1 year	8	(11.11%)
3 years to 4 years	7	(9.72%)
1 week to 1 month	6	(8.33%)
5 years to 6 years	4	(5.56%)
No answer	3	(4.17%)
9 years to 10 years	3	(4.17%)
4 years to 5 years	2	(2.78%)
7 years to 8 years	2	(2.78%)
6 years to 7 years	2	(2.78%)
Less than 1 day	1	(1.39%)
8 years to 9 years	1	(1.39%)

How did you discover CHICKEN?

Through a search on the web	42	(58.33%)
No answer	7	(9.72%)
Through another user	7	(9.72%)
Post on a mailing list/forum/newsgroup	7	(9.72%)
reddit	4	(5.56%)
Hacker news	3	(4.17%)
Friend	2	(2.78%)

Other

Linux distro's package manager
IRC
i don't remember - i think through the implementations list on schemers.org
schemers.org
#chicken on IRC
IRC mention, Scheme web resources (SchemeWiki, etc.), Wikipedia.

How frequently do you use CHICKEN?

Weekly	22	(30.56%)
Daily	20	(27.78%)
Monthly	17	(23.61%)
Rarely	6	(8.33%)
Yearly	4	(5.56%)
No answer	3	(4.17%)

How would you rate your proficiency in CHICKEN?

Intermediate	32	(44.44%)
Advanced	17	(23.61%)
Beginner	15	(20.83%)
Expert	4	(5.56%)
No answer	2	(2.78%)
Master	2	(2.78%)

Where do you use CHICKEN?

Home	66	(91.67%)
Work	21	(29.17%)
School	9	(12.5%)
No answer	1	(1.39%)

How do you characterize your use of CHICKEN?

I use it for serious hobby projects	46	(63.89%)
Just tinkering	41	(56.94%)
I use it in my research/studies	18	(25.0%)
I use it at work	15	(20.83%)
No answer	1	(1.39%)

In which domain(s) are you using CHICKEN

Network and systems programming	35	(48.61%)
Open source projects	34	(47.22%)
System administration	27	(37.5%)
Math/data analysis	26	(36.11%)
Web development	21	(29.17%)
Education	12	(16.67%)
Gaming	12	(16.67%)
Embedded systems (including Android/iOS)	10	(13.89%)
Graphics	9	(12.5%)
Building commercial products and services	8	(11.11%)
Music	5	(6.94%)
No answer	3	(4.17%)

Other

Build systems
Education meaning educating myself
prototyping and hypothesis testing

What hardware platforms do you run CHICKEN on?

x86-64 (aka amd64)	66	(91.67%)
ARM64	20	(27.78%)
ARM32	9	(12.5%)
x86	9	(12.5%)
MIPS	4	(5.56%)
No answer	1	(1.39%)

Other

What operating systems do you run CHICKEN on?

Linux	65	(90.28%)
OpenBSD	12	(16.67%)
MacOS	11	(15.28%)
Windows	9	(12.5%)
Android	7	(9.72%)
FreeBSD	7	(9.72%)
NetBSD	4	(5.56%)
Hurd	2	(2.78%)
No answer	1	(1.39%)

Other

OpenWRT
I've also run it under Minix 3.4.0RC6 on 😴x86 (ouch, don't punch me, that hurts!)

Which C compiler do you use CHICKEN with?

GCC	58	(80.56%)
clang	26	(36.11%)
I don't know	6	(8.33%)
TCC	4	(5.56%)
No answer	1	(1.39%)

Other

CHICKEN extensions (eggs)

How would you characterize the diversity of eggs?

I use eggs, but there are a couple of general things I have to implement myself	41	(56.94%)
They completely fulfill my needs	13	(18.06%)
There are many areas/tasks I miss eggs for	12	(16.67%)
No answer	6	(8.33%)

How would you characterize the quality of eggs?

Good	38	(52.78%)
Very good	18	(25.0%)
Acceptable	10	(13.89%)
No answer	5	(6.94%)
Very bad	1	(1.39%)

What eggs would you like to have available for CHICKEN?

"Packed struct" binary encode/decode for file formats and network protocols
web server egg is not being actively maintained
- Clarification: Assuming we are talking about spiffy, it is actually maintained! There haven't been many changes recently, but just because there was not the need to make new changes. If you have issues to report or have improvement suggestions, please let us know.
bindings for machine learning frameworks
uniform interface to connect to "the usual" database servers: postgresql, mysql/mariadb, mssql, sqlite
hdf5
a linter (syntax checking, common anti-pattern detections...)
- Clarification: there is a work-in-progress linter being developed as part of the beaker egg.
Blessed audio/image/graphics/GUI eggs.
More functional data structures, simple GUI library well integrated with the scheduler, easier asynchronous IO.
General conveniences, something like a standard library (see Racket). Chicken is a capable high level language but many of the eggs are wrappers around some C libraries. There is little cohesion, which feels jarring
GTK
yaml
- Clarification: there is an egg for CHICKEN 4 which has been ported to CHICKEN 5, but not yet been released as an official egg (waiting for the submission of the author).
better random number generator(s) like xoshiro or PCG
something like doxygen (but not docstring based)
nng (nanomsg next gen), Capnproto, and better math libraries (BLAS is hard to use)
More complete mysql interface
libxcb, pthreads
better xlib or higher level graphics implementations would be nice.
Pytorch C++ binding
More mathematics, audio, programming language implementation (parsers, lexers, etc.), and functional programming support (immutable structures, monads, functors, etc.).
maybe "interop" eggs, like clients and database libraries (i miss leveldb)

Documentation

How would you characterize the documentation of CHICKEN?

Good	32	(44.44%)
Very good	24	(33.33%)
Acceptable	12	(16.67%)
No answer	3	(4.17%)
Bad	1	(1.39%)

How would you characterize the documentation of eggs?

Good	28	(38.89%)
Acceptable	25	(34.72%)
Very good	9	(12.5%)
No answer	6	(8.33%)
Bad	3	(4.17%)
Very bad	1	(1.39%)

How would you characterize the CHICKEN wiki?

Good	28	(38.89%)
Very good	21	(29.17%)
Acceptable	13	(18.06%)
No answer	6	(8.33%)
Bad	3	(4.17%)
Very bad	1	(1.39%)

Contributing to CHICKEN

How do you contribute to CHICKEN?

I don't contribute at all	32	(44.44%)
I develop eggs	28	(38.89%)
I file bugs on the issues I encounter	23	(31.94%)
I submit patches to eggs	21	(29.17%)
I use the discussion channels to provide feedback	16	(22.22%)
I test CHICKEN and/or eggs	15	(20.83%)
I help at improving the documentation	10	(13.89%)
I submit patches to the CHICKEN core	7	(9.72%)
No answer	4	(5.56%)
I donate computational resources to CHICKEN	3	(4.17%)
I donate money	1	(1.39%)
I hire people to contribute to CHICKEN	1	(1.39%)

Other

I maintain binary packages for a bunch of distributions
I try to develop eggs, but nothing published so far
Review patches
It is something I'd like to do more of.

How would you characterize the process to contribute to the CHICKEN core?

I don't contribute to the CHICKEN core	58	(80.56%)
It's easy and straightforward	7	(9.72%)
It's rewarding	5	(6.94%)
No answer	4	(5.56%)
It's stressful	3	(4.17%)
It's cumbersome	1	(1.39%)

Other

They don't listen, so why bother?

How would you characterize the process to contribute to the development of eggs?

I don't contribute to the development of eggs	34	(47.22%)
It's easy and straightforward	21	(29.17%)
It's rewarding	18	(25.0%)
It's cumbersome	7	(9.72%)
It's stressful	3	(4.17%)
No answer	3	(4.17%)

Other

Finding doucumentation on how to write the .egg file was a bit tricky, but making the actual release and getting added to the coop was a breeze.
I'm trying to be better, but I don't do it often enough to be fully familiar with the process. As such, I stress a bit about whether I'm doing something wrong that will cause Mario or somebody else extra work. That said, I never feel like anybody on the team dismisses my contributions or expresses frustration at me.
It's difficult to find the source repository of individual eggs to contribute to them.
It is something I'd like to do more of.

CHICKEN at work

Do you use CHICKEN at work?

No, but I'd like to	39	(54.17%)
Yes, some of the time	13	(18.06%)
No, and I don't want to	9	(12.5%)
No answer	6	(8.33%)
Yes, most of the time	5	(6.94%)

If you do not use CHICKEN at work, why not?

My company doesn't use CHICKEN	33	(45.83%)
No answer	32	(44.44%)
It lacks critical libraries	6	(8.33%)
It's too hard to hire CHICKEN developers	6	(8.33%)
Its performance is not good enough	4	(5.56%)
It lacks critical tools	3	(4.17%)
It lacks critical features	3	(4.17%)
It does not support the platforms I need	2	(2.78%)
Its documentation is not good enough	1	(1.39%)
It is too hard to learn	1	(1.39%)

Other

The transition to chicken 5 has been very tough.
I do not have enough proficiency with it yet to use for serious work.
It is too different from the standard tools in bioinformatics to be used without causing major disruption or making things too unsustainable.
I work in academia, Python and Fortran are the only things I could sell to the higher ups, for reason of transmitting to next contributors.
I don't work.
Windows is no good C dev environment
I don't like work
I'm unemployed.
Disabled/Unemployed
Mostly, we use Rust. We work on integrating and calibration spatial sensors such as cameras, LiDAR, etc. CHICKEN is a nice language but some things are just a non-starter. We are already finding that the industry is a bit squeamish at Rust, and they want C++. It's a shame, because outside of our core APIs CHICKEN could be useful, but it likely will not get adopted.
i'm unemployed
I am a pensioner
I'm unemployed
I work in a bakery.
I'm a student.
not a programmer
a lisp simply is too radical for my company
I don't currently have a software dev job

What is the status of CHICKEN at your workplace?

I don't use it at work	39	(54.17%)
No answer	10	(13.89%)
I use it secretly	10	(13.89%)
It is used in non-production/non-critical systems	7	(9.72%)
It is used in production	6	(8.33%)

Future of CHICKEN

If CHICKEN disappeared, what languages will you consider as replacement?

Other Scheme implementation	58	(80.56%)
Common Lisp	28	(38.89%)
Clojure	17	(23.61%)
Python	14	(19.44%)
C	10	(13.89%)
Emacs Lisp	8	(11.11%)
Ocaml	7	(9.72%)
Lua	6	(8.33%)
Erlang	6	(8.33%)
Julia	5	(6.94%)
Zig	5	(6.94%)
Go	5	(6.94%)
Nim	4	(5.56%)
F#	4	(5.56%)
C++	4	(5.56%)
Rust	3	(4.17%)
Ruby	3	(4.17%)
Shell	3	(4.17%)
Prolog	3	(4.17%)
No answer	2	(2.78%)
JavaScript	2	(2.78%)
Assembly	1	(1.39%)
Java	1	(1.39%)

Other

Haskell
Haskell
Forth
Racket
Possibly Chez or Gambit Scheme, maybe begrudgingly on the former.
other Lisp dialects (PicoLisp, Kernel)
Racket
Elixir, Haskell
GNU Guile
Cuis Smalltalk
'Carp' most likely
D-Language
Pharo or Racket
Likely I'd orient towards Chez Scheme or Cyclone, assuming those are still around.
forth, sml, factor
Guile
fennel lisp
Haskell, Racket

What have been the most important advantages for you in using CHICKEN?

Interoperability with C and other languages	48	(66.67%)
Simplicity	47	(65.28%)
Availability of libraries/extensions	42	(58.33%)
User community	33	(45.83%)
Portability	31	(43.06%)
Documentation	28	(38.89%)
Performance	26	(36.11%)
Stability	19	(26.39%)
Tooling	15	(20.83%)
Support	12	(16.67%)
Error messages	8	(11.11%)
API stability	8	(11.11%)
Bug report turnaround	5	(6.94%)
No answer	2	(2.78%)

Other

Building static, dependency-free applications with CHICKEN has gotten a lot better over the 5.1 -> 5.2 timeframe. I can build a self-contained binary on Linux and expect it to run on nearly any other Linux system (modulo some GLIBC issues which I don't consider to be CHICKEN's problem). THANK YOU!
I�ve had minimal interaction with the community, but I chose Chicken for personal use because the community is pretty well regarded as friendly and welcoming.
Fun way to �use� C
it combines basically everything i look for in an implementation, which is why i stick around and help with whatever i can and use it to the exclusion of any other impls.
Compilation to native binaries. I love the fact that CHICKEN isn't as bound to the REPL as other Lisps (Scheme implementations and Common Lisp implementations alike).

What are the main areas that need improvement in CHICKEN?

Tooling	22	(30.56%)
Documentation	21	(29.17%)
Availability of libraries/extensions	21	(29.17%)
No answer	17	(23.61%)
Error messages	16	(22.22%)
Performance	15	(20.83%)
Portability	5	(6.94%)
Interoperability with C and other languages	4	(5.56%)
Support	4	(5.56%)
API stability	3	(4.17%)
Stability	3	(4.17%)
Simplicity	2	(2.78%)
User community	2	(2.78%)
Bug report turnaround	1	(1.39%)

Other

While the documentation is usually excellent (with a few cases where it assumes you know something, like the order of arguments to foldl�s procedure, and so you have to go dig up Haskell�s to find out), the main thing that�s missing feels like an improved search function. It�s not bad, anyway, but I sometimes feel that it�s difficult to find things by topic if I don�t know the exact word used on a page.
Make it a first class citizen on Windows (yeah I know)
Scalability, build times. Error messages are mostly ok, except csc occasionally likes to complain without giving a line number.
I ticked performance above because there isn't exactly a straightforward guide or set of eggs that make using multiple processes easier (since we can't use threads). It's been argued in the past whether having native OS threads is worthwhile in a language. I would say despite the problems with them, there needs to be a clear answer to "what do I do if there's no threads?" because people aren't prepared to spin up sockets themselves. I think something like nng could be good here. Easy IPC in a modern library that uses very plain C structures. A tutorial for how to send & receive messages, scale multiple processes, reduce IPC overhead, etc. would go a long way. (chicken process) does a lot to make things cross-platform, but IPC itself has been somewhat left out. I'm aware of the nanomsg egg, but the documentation there (and the fact nanomsg itself is deprecated in favour of nng) do not speak well for it. I ticked tooling above because while we have feathers, there are not a lot of easy ways to e.g. test nursery size in an automated fashion. It involves a lot of tweaking and inside knowledge of your system to be sure, but it seems like this is something that could be evaluated with different test cases. A benchmarking tool similar to the test egg would be welcome as well. I would prefer it be separate, and default to running benchmarks in a `bench/` subfolder in the egg directory. Having people get the system time and measure themselves is uh... fairly primitive and subject to misleading benchmarks. Rust's criterion crate is probably a good start on this front. (I know, I know, you can lie about anything with benchmarks, but sometimes they are useful to make sure your system meets minimum requirements).
Some more attention to the Windows version & eggs would be helpful. Nevertheless, I have been able to build all the eggs needed with some manual hacking.
As a beginner, I find the wiki difficult to use because of the prevalence of both outdated version 4 information and version 5 information. The search could also be improved.
bigger community!

What do you miss in CHICKEN?

Native threads
Threads
Static typing
Stepping through the code using emacs. Maybe it is possible (there is feathers) but I don't know how to do it.
Non-blocking IO, a la libuv would be great.
Debugging - feathers is a good start, however. Resumable error conditions a la Chez Scheme. The documentation is adequate for experienced users, but I'd like to see more in the way of tutorials that can help bring beginners aboard. The gap between beginner and expert is wide, and I fear that we may lose new users to flashier implementations like Racket.
A debugger that's not feathers
A more beginner friendly documentation. I also found out that some of the existing documentation is outdated.
Some general utility things seem to be missing sometimes. Sometimes I wish for easier ways to deal with various text formats and the like. I like ADT/enum's and wish for those sometimes. Maybe more extensive/powerful pattern matching? Haven't played with the typing enough to know if it would do the things I want out of typing.
An easy way to understand where in code a particular error came from, since it�s not always clear.
A faster csc (it gets inacceptably slow for files exceeding 1k SLOC)
- Clarification: Since csc is a compiler driver for all the steps between the Scheme -> native code translation, here it is not clear whether the perceived slowness is due to chicken (the Scheme -> C compiler) or due to the C toolchain (C -> ... -> native code). Usually the slowest part is the latter, but if you feel like the Scheme -> C part is a bottleneck in your use-case, please let us know. Hint: check the output of csc -debug b code.scm to see where the compiler is spending its time.
Better support for interactive use.
- Clarification: in case this feedback was related to the "rawness" of the behavior of stock csi, we wanted to clarify that the interactive features of csi can be augmented through the use of command-line editing eggs like breadline and linenoise (there's also parley, which has been ported to CHICKEN 5 but not yet released). Additionally, there is some support in text editors and IDEs to run csi interactively (e.g., M-x run-scheme in Emacs). If your feedback is not really related to the interactive features provided by csi, feel free to reach us to suggest improvements.
Visible activity (latest egg releases on egg page, for example), online build status of eggs
Better integration with Debian. Able to install eggs as debs.
What do you miss in CHICKEN? Default to R7Rs
Slime/Sly like interactive debugging
Better IDE support to make it more attractive to new users.
A proper build tool. Managing a larger project with just plain Make is not exactly stellar.
The windows version actually working, rather than devs getting it to compile but not actually testing it works.
I miss error handling a la Rust. I do not like exceptions and prefer to deal with Either / Result types. There's an SRFI that provides "Either," but it isn't really clear how to unwind the stack / etc into it. I admit this is probably a failing of my own, and perhaps I need to read the documentation more. Given that I can't focus my efforts on these things full time (we do not use CHICKEN at work) I can't say that I've given the docs a proper read in this instance.
Native threads, mailbox performance
This is a dream of mine, but more compile-time checking would be lovely. As a previous user of Haskell it was a great experience because I could catch a lot of bugs before even attempting to run the program. However, I do understand this is a lot more difficult because of the fact that Scheme is considerably more dynamic in it's nature.
- Clarification: CHICKEN 5 has some support for type annotations (see the Types section in the manual) which are taken into account by the compiler.
Features: A more powerful type system, syntax-case, better R7RS integration, better support for recent (post-1995) developments in functional programming. Generally: Some perspective on where this implementation is going and a more receptive approach toward ideas from outside of the CHICKEN community.
Numerical/scientific/engineering libraries, sometimes native thread support

Education, experience and professional background

Professional status

Industry (senior level)	26	(36.11%)
No answer	10	(13.89%)
Freelance software developer	7	(9.72%)
Industry (junior level)	7	(9.72%)
Unemployed	6	(8.33%)
Bachelor Student	5	(6.94%)
Graduate Student/Postdoc	3	(4.17%)
Master Student	2	(2.78%)
Management	2	(2.78%)
Senior Faculty (Ternured)	2	(2.78%)
Business owner	1	(1.39%)
Junior Faculty (Non-Ternured)	1	(1.39%)

Other

University research staff
currently unemployed but senior industry level
pensioner
Secondary school.

Highest educational degree obtained

Bachelor of Science	21	(29.17%)
Master of Science	17	(23.61%)
No answer	14	(19.44%)
Ph.D.	11	(15.28%)
Current undergraduate student	9	(12.5%)

Other

Bachelor of Arts
enough credits for two masters and then some but no actual degree
What's a "degree"?

Programming experience

4 - 8 years	13	(18.06%)
9 - 13 years	12	(16.67%)
14 - 18 years	10	(13.89%)
34 - 38 years	9	(12.5%)
29 - 33 years	8	(11.11%)
19 - 23 years	5	(6.94%)
24 - 28 years	4	(5.56%)
No answer	4	(5.56%)
39 - 43 years	3	(4.17%)
0 - 3 years	3	(4.17%)
49 - 53 years	1	(1.39%)

Programming experience with Lisp dialects (e.g., Scheme, Common Lisp, Emacs Lisp, Clojure)

0 - 3 years	21	(29.17%)
4 - 8 years	17	(23.61%)
9 - 13 years	9	(12.5%)
24 - 28 years	7	(9.72%)
19 - 23 years	5	(6.94%)
No answer	4	(5.56%)
14 - 18 years	4	(5.56%)
34 - 38 years	2	(2.78%)
29 - 33 years	2	(2.78%)
49 - 53 years	1	(1.39%)

Which programming languages other than Scheme are you fluent in?

C	54	(75.0%)
Python	38	(52.78%)
Shell	32	(44.44%)
Common Lisp	22	(30.56%)
C++	22	(30.56%)
JavaScript	20	(27.78%)
Java	19	(26.39%)
Emacs Lisp	17	(23.61%)
Lua	13	(18.06%)
Ruby	12	(16.67%)
Assembly	11	(15.28%)
Go	11	(15.28%)
Rust	10	(13.89%)
Clojure	10	(13.89%)
Perl	8	(11.11%)
C#	7	(9.72%)
Prolog	7	(9.72%)
PHP	7	(9.72%)
Ocaml	6	(8.33%)
No answer	4	(5.56%)
Zig	3	(4.17%)
Erlang	3	(4.17%)
R	3	(4.17%)
F#	3	(4.17%)
Nim	2	(2.78%)
Kotlin	2	(2.78%)
Tcl	2	(2.78%)
Julia	1	(1.39%)
Scala	1	(1.39%)

Other

To a lesser extent, various BASICs.
Fortran90
BCPL, Pascal, FORTRAN IV, FORTH, SML, many others
Haskell
Smalltalk
Objective-C/C++, mini-Kanren (that's not scheme, right?)
Haskell
matlab,elixir
sml forth
fennel lisp, forth
Haskell, AWK, rc, Agda

Which Scheme implementations other than CHICKEN do you use?

No answer	24	(33.33%)
Guile	21	(29.17%)
Racket	20	(27.78%)
Chibi	13	(18.06%)
Gambit	12	(16.67%)
Chez	12	(16.67%)
MIT Scheme	8	(11.11%)
Kawa	8	(11.11%)
Gauche	4	(5.56%)
Bigloo	2	(2.78%)
Tinyscheme	2	(2.78%)
Scheme48	1	(1.39%)
SISC	1	(1.39%)
RScheme	1	(1.39%)
Stalin	1	(1.39%)
IronScheme	1	(1.39%)
Larceny	1	(1.39%)

Other

STklos, loko
I miss STk :)
Limited use with Racket. I mostly only use it when trying to run code someone else has written.
all of these i have used, but as previously mentioned, i basically use chicken exclusively now, and have done for some years.
Gerbil
my own implementation

Feedback

Any extra feedback about CHICKEN you'd like to provide?

Community is awesome
You rock!
thanks for all your work
You are the best programming community that I am part of!
The best scheme implementation and community I've seen.
Installing from source could be easier. I can never remember how to install or update my installation. I find the search in the wiki (and Google search) almost impossible to use as it always returns documentation for older CHICKEN versions with no way to view the same page for the latest version of CHICKEN.
Best Scheme community, one of the best documentation and ecosystem, please keep the good work
Thanks for the work, it is a great tool to have in my toolbox
Tooling is very important. For local development, being able to run tests for the "local" code (something like `chicken-install -n -test`) is really useful. Other than that, something akin to Python's virtualenvs would be pretty handy.
I don't know how useful my input is, I have honestly not used CHICKEN scheme very seriously in the last 2 to 3 years, since the release of 5.0 which broke my workflow with it's reorganization. I tried to give as accurate a representation of the state of things. Fellows, thank you for your work.
k Any extra feedback about CHICKEN you'd like to provide? Pleas default to R7Rs
I'd like to see more CHICKEN 4 eggs ported to CHICKEN 5. The eggs are the main draw to CHICKEN over Guile for me.
Keep up the awesome work! I love CHICKEN, and hope contributing more in the near future.
The community is very polite and friendly.
Good documentation tools really make a language for me. Rust and Racket have two of the best documentation tools I've seen.
chickens go BOK BOK BOK.
Docs are plentiful but challenging to actually use. I'd prefer examples up front.
You are lovely people <3
Absolutely love the language and community

How can we improve this survey?

the list of Scheme implementations is outdated!
I use dust to install Chicken, because it is easier than compiling and still enable me to install in userspace. I don't like installing eggs (that I consider untrusted code) on the root of my system, that is why I install in userspace. So maybe consider other installations path that OS and compilation.
Use more coarse date ranges for "How long have you been using CHICKEN?", more than industry junior/senior for "Professional status".
Include more non-university education levels so no one feels excluded
Not an improvement point, sorry, but I liked the "I use it secretly at work" option ;)
Fewer questions because it's a bit easy to guess who is who from these answers.
i think it's kinda cool that you're doing the survey but i'm not entirely sure why.
please post the results on the mailing list! thank you
It's great honestly, good job.