From: Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>
To: Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com>
Cc: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>, guile-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Anything better for delayed lexical evaluation than (lambda () ...)?
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 06:03:51 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87vcpjmn3c.fsf@netris.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87liqf5uty.fsf@pobox.com> (Andy Wingo's message of "Wed, 14 Dec 2011 11:08:41 +0100")
Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> writes:
> On Wed 14 Dec 2011 08:50, Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org> writes:
>
>> I have successfully implemented the (capture-lexical-environment)
>> special form in the evaluator, and also primitive-local-eval.
>
> I dunno, Mark. That's a neat hack, but why should we have it in Guile?
> It can't compile. It's not for efficiency, because if you wanted more
> efficiency, you would compile. So what is it for? It has a cost, so it
> needs to justify itself.
For starters, it's for handling languages like Lilypond, which
fundamentally _cannot_ be compiled. It's not a question of
implementation strategy. Even if someone were willing to rewrite
Lilypond's implementation from scratch, I have become convinced that it
cannot be compiled without redesigning the language itself.
More generally, it's to increase the generality and flexibility of
Guile. One of the things I like most about Scheme is that it is
powerful enough to implement just about anything on top of it, using
just about any strategy you wish, in a simple, straightforward manner,
thanks to advanced features like macros and continuations.
I found it somewhat embarrassing that Guile 2.0 was unable to gracefully
support a language that Guile 1.8 handled beautifully. I would like to
fix that.
Also, I think that it is crucially important to keep the Lilypond
developers happy with Guile. We don't have very many users. We should
make an effort to keep our existing users happy.
Mark
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-12-14 11:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 82+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-12-03 15:45 Anything better for delayed lexical evaluation than (lambda () ...)? David Kastrup
2011-12-03 16:44 ` Andy Wingo
2011-12-06 14:55 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen
2011-12-06 15:45 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-06 19:50 ` Marco Maggi
2011-12-11 9:33 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-11 9:51 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-12 5:21 ` Mark H Weaver
2011-12-12 6:47 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-12 18:29 ` Mark H Weaver
2011-12-12 19:56 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-12 20:39 ` rixed
2011-12-12 21:02 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-12 21:58 ` Mark H Weaver
2011-12-12 21:40 ` Mark H Weaver
2011-12-12 21:50 ` Andy Wingo
2011-12-13 9:02 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-13 13:05 ` Andy Wingo
2011-12-13 13:56 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-13 14:34 ` Andy Wingo
2011-12-13 15:27 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-13 15:48 ` Andy Wingo
2011-12-13 16:08 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-13 16:27 ` Andy Wingo
2011-12-13 16:54 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-13 18:58 ` Andy Wingo
2011-12-13 22:23 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-13 17:28 ` Mark H Weaver
2011-12-13 18:49 ` Andy Wingo
2011-12-13 19:15 ` Mark H Weaver
2011-12-13 23:00 ` Noah Lavine
2011-12-13 23:16 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-13 23:44 ` Andy Wingo
2011-12-13 23:39 ` Andy Wingo
2011-12-13 23:45 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-14 10:15 ` Andy Wingo
2011-12-14 10:32 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-14 0:30 ` Mark H Weaver
2011-12-14 8:16 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-14 0:42 ` Noah Lavine
2011-12-14 0:47 ` Noah Lavine
2011-12-14 1:30 ` Mark H Weaver
2011-12-14 7:50 ` Mark H Weaver
2011-12-14 8:48 ` [PATCH] Implement `capture-lexical-environment' in evaluator Mark H Weaver
2011-12-14 9:08 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-14 9:36 ` Mark H Weaver
2011-12-16 9:21 ` [PATCH] Implement `the-environment' and `local-eval' " Mark H Weaver
2011-12-16 9:32 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-16 14:00 ` Peter TB Brett
2011-12-16 14:26 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-16 15:27 ` Mark H Weaver
2011-12-16 16:01 ` Andy Wingo
2011-12-16 17:44 ` Mark H Weaver
2011-12-16 19:12 ` Mark H Weaver
2012-01-07 1:26 ` Andy Wingo
2012-01-07 17:30 ` Mark H Weaver
2012-01-07 1:18 ` Andy Wingo
2011-12-16 16:59 ` Hans Aberg
2011-12-14 10:08 ` Anything better for delayed lexical evaluation than (lambda () ...)? Andy Wingo
2011-12-14 10:27 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-14 13:35 ` Andy Wingo
2011-12-14 15:21 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-14 15:55 ` Andy Wingo
2011-12-14 17:26 ` Mark H Weaver
2011-12-14 18:23 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-14 18:38 ` Mark H Weaver
2011-12-14 19:14 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-14 19:44 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-14 22:56 ` Andy Wingo
2011-12-14 11:03 ` Mark H Weaver [this message]
2011-12-14 11:18 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-14 13:31 ` Noah Lavine
2011-12-14 21:03 ` Mark H Weaver
2011-12-14 22:12 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-14 22:24 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-14 22:55 ` Andy Wingo
2011-12-13 16:24 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-13 15:52 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-13 11:14 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-14 13:52 ` Ludovic Courtès
2011-12-14 14:27 ` David Kastrup
2011-12-14 21:30 ` Ludovic Courtès
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87vcpjmn3c.fsf@netris.org \
--to=mhw@netris.org \
--cc=dak@gnu.org \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=wingo@pobox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).