From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel,gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: anyone define port types? Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2016 19:02:09 +0200 Message-ID: <87bn37wtf2.fsf@pobox.com> References: <87y492mnjp.fsf@pobox.com> <87pots9tag.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1465664576 9117 80.91.229.3 (11 Jun 2016 17:02:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2016 17:02:56 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-user , guile-devel To: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 11 19:02:45 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1bBmJ2-0007jU-Ua for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 11 Jun 2016 19:02:45 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47843 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bBmJ1-0003SZ-UU for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 11 Jun 2016 13:02:43 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50003) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bBmIg-0003SS-TH for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Jun 2016 13:02:23 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bBmIc-00038B-KY for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Jun 2016 13:02:21 -0400 Original-Received: from pb-sasl2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.67]:65325 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bBmIc-000380-GQ; Sat, 11 Jun 2016 13:02:18 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-sasl2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2D0020F4C; Sat, 11 Jun 2016 13:02:17 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=+0k0LVyTGI9T iDsqrFlKpGf/liQ=; b=sgM0buhI4ixgf6b5A/KwQgfSnK7VFRf8pJ3KPKA8l0up ghyZq5TU3czvs/M2ys6WqeGXFE/EH2liuPm0LObBqx4mIiT2vicYlIoXe2Q+Jcab BFjrJO+lU/QwsQeqOKlEZYoSRphoVlG+AFGz2WxKRPSY1vZUranuS04wwtjc7eU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=k0rEKr fFn6IdboPCIn5n/qwEtICvIyq0IxEoZK8I169P9hkmsvGfBUHGU2boaQAS4zkPAX +abK1b0wk50al/4n3IR2GoW2DdT2zYD3Y8WHgGynqPArBsk3khpD3KgE0wxsMRBF pAfhcVUANelF/vUSUD4Sjdmj6Y1YLM1Iy1K1M= Original-Received: from pb-sasl2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-sasl2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC60620F4B; Sat, 11 Jun 2016 13:02:17 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from clucks (unknown [88.160.190.192]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-sasl2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CE4B620F4A; Sat, 11 Jun 2016 13:02:16 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87pots9tag.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s=22'?= =?utf-8?Q?s?= message of "Thu, 14 Apr 2016 16:08:55 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 407EA808-2FF6-11E6-941F-28A6F1301B6D-02397024!pb-sasl2.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 64.147.108.67 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "guile-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:18342 gmane.lisp.guile.user:12627 Archived-At: On Thu 14 Apr 2016 16:08, ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: > Andy Wingo skribis: > >> I am working on improving our port implementation to take advantage of >> the opportunity to break ABI in 2.2. I am wondering how much I can >> break C API as well -- there are some changes that would allow better >> user-space threading >> (e.g. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel/14158/focus=3D15463 >> or Chris Webber's 8sync). But those changes would require some >> incompatible changes to the C API related to port internals. This API >> is pretty much only used when implementing port types. So, I would like >> to collect a list of people that implement their own ports :) I know >> Guile-GNOME does it for GNOME-VFS, though GNOME-VFS is super-old at this >> point... Anyway. Looking forward to your links :) > > What do you conclude from this poll? :-) > > From what you=E2=80=99ve seen, how do you think current uses would impact= the > refactoring work (and vice versa)? Sorry for the late response :) My conclusion is that we should not change anything about the Scheme interface, but that with close communication with C port hackers, we can feel OK about changing the C interface to make it both more simple and more expressive. Since libguile is parallel-installable and you have to select the version of your Guile when you build your project, of course people will be able to update / upgrade when they choose to. I put in a lot of effort to the documentation; check it out: http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/docs/master/guile.html/Input-and-Output= .html Andy