Re: Guile 64-bit Windows support, redux

["Thompson, David" <dthompson2@worcester.edu>]

On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 3:19 PM Jonas Hahnfeld <hahnjo@hahnjo.de> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2024-02-07 at 09:19 -0500, Thompson, David wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 5:40 AM Jonas Hahnfeld via Developers list for
> > Guile, the GNU extensibility library <guile-devel@gnu.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 2023-11-28 at 22:04 +0100, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Ping, any comments on this approach? I built binaries for LilyPond
> > > > 2.25.10 using these patches applied on top of Guile 3.0.9 and the
> > > > result seems to work fine on Windows.
> > >
> > > Another ping; meanwhile we switched to building the official binaries
> > > of LilyPond with Guile 3.0 starting from version 2.25.11, but it would
> > > be really great to get rid of our downstream patches...
> >
> > Just chiming in to say this is a very exciting development that I had
> > missed when the patch set was first sent!
> >
> > Does this allow a fully featured Guile build or are some things still
> > disabled? Does JIT work?
>
> It's functional enough to run LilyPond (which uses quite a bit of
> Guile) and well enough so that there is only one complaint (that I know
> of so far) about multiplication with negative numbers not working
> right. If I remember correctly from quickly having a look, that's
> related to scm_integer_mul_ii using long_magnitude which doesn't quite
> work on Windows 64-bit. For LilyPond, we disable some features (JIT,
> threading, networking; you can look at the full build recipe here:
> https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/blob/master/release/binaries/lib/dependencies.py#L628
> ) and I don't know which of these would work or how much it would take
> to support them.

Ah, bummer. That's a lot of disabled features.  JIT and threads are
must-haves for my use-cases.  I guess I'll continue waiting for
someone to figure out how to build a fully featured Guile on Windows.
Any takers? ;)

- Dave