From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: The Road to 2.2 Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 00:06:25 +0200 Message-ID: <87fvxiwroe.fsf@gnu.org> References: <878v3dgtv0.fsf@pobox.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1369001420 16984 80.91.229.3 (19 May 2013 22:10:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 22:10:20 +0000 (UTC) To: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon May 20 00:10:19 2013 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 1UeBo3-0005pP-1A for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 20 May 2013 00:10:19 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41111 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UeBo2-0001nP-FV for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 19 May 2013 18:10:18 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:34534) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UeBns-0001m3-TV for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 May 2013 18:10:15 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UeBno-0001Gj-63 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 May 2013 18:10:08 -0400 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:59832) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UeBnn-0001Et-Vz for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 May 2013 18:10:04 -0400 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UeBnm-0005dW-QR for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 May 2013 00:10:02 +0200 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 ; Mon, 20 May 2013 00:10:02 +0200 Original-Received: from ludo by reverse-83.fdn.fr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 20 May 2013 00:10:02 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 38 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: reverse-83.fdn.fr X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 1 Prairial an 221 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0xEA52ECF4 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 83C4 F8E5 10A3 3B4C 5BEA D15D 77DD 95E2 EA52 ECF4 X-OS: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu User-Agent: Gnus/5.130005 (Ma Gnus v0.5) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:n5c6ZCsf3s/q7dJSpIpSfDqWd9c= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:16384 Archived-At: Hello! This is all very exciting! Andy Wingo skribis: > However, I think we've done all we can in branches. I think we should > bless this RTL experiment as the way to do Guile 2.2. (Thoughts or > objections welcome.) To that end, I think we need to start merging > wip-rtl into master. > > What I propose is that, if we agree, I start merging in trivial stuff. > When I get to something interesting that's not just a refactoring of > existing things, I'll submit that patch to the list. We have a few days > to look at it, we go through some review, and then we figure out how to > move forward -- usually merging some version of that patch. Then we > repeat. Sounds like a good plan. > Once the RTL branch is all merged in, we can start doing the same with > Noah's wip-rtl-cps branch. I’m unclear on what the safest or easiest approach is. My natural tendency would have led me to start by “just” rewriting the GLIL->assembly pass, and only then go with the fancy CPS compiler. But I gather that the CPS compiler may facilitate the conversion to assembly. What’s your take on this? > Then eventually some glorious day comes and we start using the CPS/RTL > toolchain, everything is working great and fast, and we start deleting > the old code. Looking forward to that day. :-) Ludo’.