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 Subject: Re: Compiler Branch Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 21:49:57 +0100 Message-ID: <87y5t2rte2.fsf@pobox.com> References: <87wra0c0y5.fsf@pobox.com> <87mxa0iaxj.fsf@pobox.com> <877h12dz5a.fsf@pobox.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1327092621 21169 80.91.229.12 (20 Jan 2012 20:50:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 20:50:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel To: Noah Lavine Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 20 21:50:14 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RoLPY-0006GS-T4 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 21:50:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35647 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RoLPX-0007sk-Pw for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:50:11 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:55792) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RoLPT-0007ra-94 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:50:08 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RoLPR-0002co-Ho for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:50:07 -0500 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com ([74.115.168.62]:62276 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RoLPR-0002cO-Dn for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:50:05 -0500 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1E72852D; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:50:04 -0500 (EST) 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; s=sasl; bh=TDJnxMfL1luzJnSeVNzbmTm4Lkw=; b=drO9U2 haKX4f1KT1B4eITE5giXEBWfa/Po2Z5q+TXW8R0dUATBE7Q0zTQ/+ms9YQknJwY3 FneURSZ/kbIjMV+ofEoAjQAOWWTQF6fCIXOgGeXkMxzoffVcWP4O/5J2bCFOPDg/ Svi6onCv1pytmsCwowKo78ejzN77FMtlMYnZk= 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; q=dns; s=sasl; b=v8TIYKVnOk3e4Fnj6MUdEfYtwHmfon5j Zk7Ixa8hYTWVW6jZI13QW+utyeAuUohneJk3NHB4yievGveefFeXplHz7r/8Zvsz WyhKg77yDMmlGWgmvIJEIdRdx11HYqde+046wC9ayNvbTWO4OQwL20GNSG0p2NKd JxKIsuflk2c= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A054C852C; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:50:04 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from badger (unknown [90.164.198.39]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5E91B8526; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:50:01 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Noah Lavine's message of "Sun, 8 Jan 2012 16:15:47 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.3 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 527DCBA4-43A8-11E1-B165-65B1DE995924-02397024!a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 74.115.168.62 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:13607 Archived-At: Heya Noah, A brief note: On Sun 08 Jan 2012 22:15, Noah Lavine writes: > I do think there's a problem with plain CPS, though - it forces you to > pick an order for the evaluation of function arguments. I would like > to use CPS with some sort of parallel-call operator, so we can leave > the order undefined (maybe at some point an optimizer will want to > adjust the order). What do you think? > > I also noticed that at the end of that blog post you said you were > considering ANF versus CPS for Guile (I assume you'd already decided > that you didn't like Tree-IL). Does this mean you decided on CPS? I guess I'd like to see if it's a good idea or not. We definitely do need a parallel binding operator. I haven't already decided on it but I am interested. Andy -- http://wingolog.org/