Re: In support of guile-emacs

[Daniel Colascione <dancol@dancol.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 943 bytes --]

On 10/19/2015 03:24 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> Hello, Xue.
> 
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 09:07:59AM +0800, Xue Fuqiao wrote:
> 
>> guile-emacs replaces Emacs's own Emacs Lisp engine with Guile's (without
>> breaking backward compatibility).  So:
> 
>> * Emacs Lisp will execute faster (Guile VM bytecode is more efficient)
> 
> Just as a matter of interest, approximately how much faster is Guile
> bytecode than Emacs bytecode?  Are we talking about 10%, 20%, 50%, a
> factor of 2, or even higher?
> 
> If that speed increase was significant, it might be worth incorporating
> Guile's bytecode into Emacs just for that reason, regardless of any of
> the other stuff.

Or simply making completely independent and custom-tailored improvements
to the Emacs bytecode compiler and interpreter itself. There's no reason
to imagine that the only way to improve performance there is to move to
a completely different runtime.


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]