Re: guile 3 update, halloween edition

[Nala Ginrut <nalaginrut@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1763 bytes --]

Hi Andy! Thanks for all the work!

On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 4:55 AM Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> wrote:

> Hey folks!
>
> I wanted to send out an update on Guile 3.  Do take a look at
> https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guile.git/tree/NEWS to see where we've
> come; basically the JIT is done, and we're ready to release soonish.
>

Guile powered by JIT was confirmed to increase at least 20% performance for
Artanis.
And this is a rough result of the early-bird version of Guile-2.9. I
haven't tried the latest.
I'm looking forward to an official release of Guile-3 so that I can manage
to support the version detection correctly. It was 2.9 but should detect as
3.0, IIRC.



> But!  Now we have bootstrapping problems; how to get the implementation
> in boot-9?  Exceptions in SRFI-35, R6RS, R7RS, and Racket are these
> hierarchical things: they form a DAG of subtypes.  But core records in
> Guile aren't subtypeable, so what to do?
>

Are you talking about Guile specific record-type?
Personally, I've gradually reduced my usage of Guile records. I think R6RS
records are better for me.
I didn't know the Guile bootstrapping requires Guile specific record-type.
So I don't know better advice.


> There will be bijections
> between a Guile's "throw" arguments and structured exceptions, mostly
> inspired with what Julian did in the R6RS layer already.
>

That's cool!


> Thoughts welcome!  Also: should these structured error objects be named
> exceptions or conditions?  SRFI-35, R6RS, and R7RS say "conditions", but
> racket and my heart say "exceptions"; wdyt?
>

I never say "condition" to describe an exception. I always say "exception".
Most other languages use "exception" too. The term "condition" sounds like
conditional branching.

Best regards.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2964 bytes --]