From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Thien-Thi Nguyen Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: despair, debugging, and the repl Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 22:32:32 +0200 Message-ID: <87631qpr1b.fsf@ambire.localdomain> References: <87ljanxdi9.fsf@ambire.localdomain> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1276203225 30714 80.91.229.12 (10 Jun 2010 20:53:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 20:53:45 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel To: Andy Wingo Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jun 10 22:53:43 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OMokx-0001a8-GW for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 22:53:43 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36352 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OMoi6-0001WM-5b for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 16:50:46 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=32774 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OMoYi-0005gn-MT for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 16:41:05 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OMoYg-0003U1-T2 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 16:41:04 -0400 Original-Received: from smtp207.alice.it ([82.57.200.103]:37722 helo=smtp207-alice.cp.alice.it) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OMoYg-0003TS-Ai for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 16:41:02 -0400 Original-Received: from ambire.localdomain (95.236.70.202) by smtp207-alice.cp.alice.it (8.5.124.05) id 4C0E61DE001D6570; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 22:34:41 +0200 Original-Received: from ttn by ambire.localdomain with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OMoQT-0000SE-2s; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 22:32:33 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Andy Wingo's message of "Thu, 10 Jun 2010 16:36:57 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.91 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:10461 Archived-At: () Andy Wingo () Thu, 10 Jun 2010 16:36:57 +0200 The old repl, yes. I was wondering how to deprecate it in boot-9 but I think I have figured out a way. Cool. > Surely, not trashing Neil's work entirely is better? Trashing is a loaded word :) It is always available in its original form in git. But it hasn't worked, is the problem -- it relies on hooks from ceval and deval that just aren't there any more. The part that coincides with the new implementation is equivalent in functionality, though Neil's code is nicer, I admit. This suggests to me that the best course is to re-examine both implementations in terms of high and low layers, substituting the untenable low bits in Neil's code with the new low bits you wrote, and keeping the high bits of Neil's code. Guile needs to promote one main repl implementation, and one main debugger. There is room for others, but if they are to remain in Guile itself, they need to be maintained. Agreed. I think ultimately whoever does the work (sounds like it's all you, in this case) decides, so i'll just briefly voice my support for good documentation of the low bits, perhaps written before doing anything else, so that if the above old-high/new-low suggestion is not followed now, perhaps someone can follow it later. (Everything is in Git, anyway, as you said.) thi