From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ken Raeburn Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Why Emacs should have a good web-browser Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 03:18:43 -0400 Message-ID: <8548A4DA-8700-4A7B-AAE2-37A3CE030D7A@raeburn.org> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1247469557 3138 80.91.229.12 (13 Jul 2009 07:19:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 07:19:17 +0000 (UTC) To: Emacs-Devel devel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jul 13 09:19:10 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MQFob-0004yQ-GO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 09:19:10 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38279 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MQFoa-0005Ya-Uy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 03:19:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MQFoV-0005YL-8a for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 03:19:03 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MQFoP-0005XQ-RZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 03:19:02 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=42943 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MQFoP-0005XN-MX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 03:18:57 -0400 Original-Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:33696) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MQFoP-0000m4-7H for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 03:18:57 -0400 Original-Received: from raeburn.org ([69.25.196.97]) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MQFoE-00054V-Fr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 03:18:54 -0400 Original-Received: from [10.0.0.172] (squish.raeburn.org [10.0.0.172]) by raeburn.org (8.14.3/8.14.1) with ESMTP id n6D7Ih98026898; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 03:18:43 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3) X-Detected-Operating-System: by mx20.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:112397 Archived-At: On Jul 11, 2009, at 16:24, Stefan Monnier wrote: > The Emacs/W3 way is sadly unworkable because of the > amount of effort this requires (compounded by the performance > limitations of Elisp). Guile has had some performance work done lately, and has a bytecode engine of its own; no JIT compilation to machine code yet, but people are certainly keeping it in mind. I don't know how the ECMAScript performance compares to a random browser's Javascript engine currently, and (according to http://wingolog.org/archives/2009/02/22/ecmascript-for-guile though maybe things have changed) I guess Andy Wingo doesn't either. But the ECMAScript support is a second language reader for the compiler, so when the Scheme compilation and optimization support improves, so should the ECMAScript support. Ken