From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?=) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: vm status update Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 23:31:01 +0100 Message-ID: <87ab7ys2qi.fsf@gnu.org> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1236378685 18478 80.91.229.12 (6 Mar 2009 22:31:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 22:31:25 +0000 (UTC) To: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 06 23:32:42 2009 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 4.50) id 1Lfiav-0003XO-Dd for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 06 Mar 2009 23:32:41 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53695 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LfiZZ-0005e2-UH for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 06 Mar 2009 17:31:17 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LfiZX-0005dn-61 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Mar 2009 17:31:15 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LfiZW-0005dZ-LS for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Mar 2009 17:31:14 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=34505 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LfiZW-0005dW-Ff for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Mar 2009 17:31:14 -0500 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:59262 helo=ciao.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LfiZW-00077k-5R for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Mar 2009 17:31:14 -0500 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1LfiZR-0002c8-So for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Mar 2009 22:31:10 +0000 Original-Received: from reverse-83.fdn.fr ([80.67.176.83]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 06 Mar 2009 22:31:09 +0000 Original-Received: from ludo by reverse-83.fdn.fr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 06 Mar 2009 22:31:09 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 36 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: reverse-83.fdn.fr User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.90 (gnu/linux) X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 16 =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vent=F4se?= an 217 de la =?iso-8859-1?Q?R=E9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0xEA52ECF4 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 821D 815D 902A 7EAB 5CEE D120 7FBA 3D4F EB1F 5364 X-OS: i686-pc-linux-gnu Cancel-Lock: sha1:JJObNqe2lWeQ02CHCgRkw7oG5l8= X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:8239 Archived-At: Hello! Andy Wingo writes: > * I've started to think about optimization, and what's clear is that > GHIL as it stands is too much of a pain in the ass -- you can't turn > a ((lambda ...) ...) into a (let ... ...) without like 30 lines of > code. I decided that having alpha-renamed variables would eliminate > the need for , and make GHIL actually readable and > writable without loss of information. Sounds interesting! > Syncase + GHIL without also gives us the opportunity to > simplify GHIL itself, removing e.g. quasiquote in favor of syncase's > expansion. That can let us simplify the evaluator too. The interpreter > could even become threadsafe, eventually. Hmm, the main reason why the interpreter (I mean, `CEVAL ()') isn't thread-safe is that memoization itself isn't thread-safe. How would syncase expansion help here? > Anyway, that's where I am. Bug-wise we still have a bug in backtraces, > which I need to pin down at some point, and update docs -- but generally > speaking we're mergeable. What do people think, should I be working on > master at some point? Sure. Neil: what do you think? Looking at `vm', it's been sometime since the last merge with `master', so it'd be worth checking that things still work. Although this may not be a show-stopper to the merge IMO, do you have benchmark results? Thanks, Ludo'.