From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Han-Wen Nienhuys Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Avoid `SCM_VALIDATE_LIST ()' Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 21:10:40 -0300 Message-ID: References: <87hc90u9lb.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: hanwen@xs4all.nl NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1220573550 25364 80.91.229.12 (5 Sep 2008 00:12:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 00:12:30 +0000 (UTC) To: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 05 02:13:25 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KbOx2-0007KW-VK for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 05 Sep 2008 02:13:25 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51032 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KbOw3-0002IN-5j for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 04 Sep 2008 20:12:23 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KbOvz-0002Eg-4E for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Sep 2008 20:12:19 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KbOvy-0002Ci-8k for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Sep 2008 20:12:18 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=43016 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KbOvy-0002CN-34 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Sep 2008 20:12:18 -0400 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:59660 helo=ciao.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KbOvx-0007Za-KK for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Sep 2008 20:12:18 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1KbOvt-00047k-CE for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Sep 2008 00:12:13 +0000 Original-Received: from 201.80.3.52 ([201.80.3.52]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 05 Sep 2008 00:12:13 +0000 Original-Received: from hanwen by 201.80.3.52 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 05 Sep 2008 00:12:13 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 44 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 201.80.3.52 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080723) In-Reply-To: X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:7592 Archived-At: Andy Wingo escreveu: > On Sun 31 Aug 2008 17:12, Han-Wen Nienhuys writes: > >> On a tangent, is anyone still seriously considering to run Emacs atop GUILE? >> (It looks a bit like a travesty if we're trying to accomodate elisp while >> also trying to follow standards like SRFI-x and RxRS) > > I think it makes a *lot* of sense to compile elisp to the VM. I don't > plan on doing so myself, but if the VM gets good enough, it could be > enhanced with the instructions that elisp needs, if any, and it would be > possible to run emacs lisp code, and possibly even emacs itself, on > guile. > > Guile-VM already has a language-agnostic compiler, repl, etc. Scheme > compilation starts with a language-specific reader then translation to > GHIL, at which point the generic compilation proceeds. You could plug in > an elisp reader and translator (see > module/language/scheme/translate.scm) to GHIL, or compile directly to > GLIL. Well, I remember having a flamewar with RMS about language agnosticism and running emacs on GUILE about 8 years ago, and I don't think we have progressed much since then. Extrapolating this pace, I think it's a waste of time. > I don't know where the boundary lies regarding C primitives, though. I > think we'll eventually want to make VM-implemented functions as fast or > faster than the C ones, through a tracing JIT or something. So you could > make elisp reference different C primitives, or implement its primitives > in elisp (or scheme, or whatever), or make our C primitives do both. Actually, on a complete tangent: There is a large industry movement trying to optimize the hell out of JavaScript, since it is used in browsers. How much sense does it make to translate Scheme or LISP to JavaScript and have (for example) V8 or tracemonkey handle it? I'm not very familiar with JavaScript, but I recall it shared lots of characteristics with LISP. I am fairly certain that we will never out-optimize (for example) V8. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - hanwen@xs4all.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen