From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Neil Jerram Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Syntax checks Date: 08 Apr 2002 19:27:20 +0100 Sender: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1018291016 20226 127.0.0.1 (8 Apr 2002 18:36:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 18:36:56 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Guile Development List Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16ue0d-0005G6-00 for ; Mon, 08 Apr 2002 20:36:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16ue01-00059y-00; Mon, 08 Apr 2002 14:36:17 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.uklinux.net ([80.84.72.21] helo=s1.uklinux.net) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16udzK-00056r-00 for ; Mon, 08 Apr 2002 14:35:34 -0400 Original-Received: from portalet.ossau.uklinux.net (IDENT:root@ppp-1b-47.3com.telinco.net [212.159.129.47]) by s1.uklinux.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g38IZEa07018; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 19:35:16 +0100 Original-Received: from laruns.ossau.uklinux.net.ossau.uklinux.net (neil@laruns.ossau.uklinux.net [192.168.1.3]) by portalet.ossau.uklinux.net (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA30368; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 19:30:59 +0100 Original-To: Dirk Herrmann In-Reply-To: Original-Lines: 41 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 Errors-To: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:335 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:335 >>>>> "Dirk" == Dirk Herrmann writes: Dirk> No, certainly not. However, the evaluator has to check for it. The Dirk> reason is the following: SCM_CEVAL _must_ be called with a non-immediate. Dirk> That means that whereever SCM_CEVAL is to be called with some expression, Dirk> the special case of an immediate has to be checked before doing the actual Dirk> call. Dirk> In the execution of the 'do body, every expression is checked to be an Dirk> immediate, and if it isn't, then SCM_CEVAL is called. It is this kind of Dirk> check (and a couple of similar ones) that I try to remove, since it slows Dirk> down the evaluator. That sounds fine. Dirk> As you may have noticed, I have already started to clean up the evaluator Dirk> code (although that process is far from finished yet). The number of jump Dirk> labels has been reduced, the intra-function communication has been Dirk> simplified and the code has been made somewhat easier (IMO) to understand. Dirk> Things are going slowly, but they are proceeding :-) Yes, I had noticed, although I'm not sure I'd call the code understandable yet :-) (not by me, anyway) Good luck! >> >From the debugging point of view, the requirements are that >> >> - breakpoint positions are preserved as code is transformed >> >> - when a breakpoint is hit, it is possible to map back from the >> transformed breakpoint location to the coordinates of the breakpoint >> in the original source. Dirk> I have to admit that I have not taken a look at how debugging works. If Dirk> you agree, we can work together: Before doing any changes to the Dirk> evaluator, I would double check with you. Sure; the only possible problem is that I don't have much time during the week these days, so I might slow you down. I'd be happy to check things over the weekend. Neil _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel