From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: How to make GNU Guile more successful Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2017 13:19:47 +0100 Message-ID: <87shmubli4.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <2e4e293e-618e-809a-2eff-31576319ea61@gmx.de> <874lzod28a.fsf@web.de> <6deb1610-e31b-b5c2-e9c9-95a2289af216@gmx.de> <87mvdfs6mh.fsf@web.de> <871sued8h7.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1488543628 22981 195.159.176.226 (3 Mar 2017 12:20:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 12:20:28 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Guile User To: Nala Ginrut Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 03 13:20:24 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-user@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cjmC0-0004nq-Os for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Fri, 03 Mar 2017 13:20:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57453 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cjmC6-0004wg-Ob for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Fri, 03 Mar 2017 07:20:22 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38312) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cjmBf-0004uS-Gv for guile-user@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Mar 2017 07:19:56 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cjmBb-00034Y-FU for guile-user@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Mar 2017 07:19:55 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:49341) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cjmBb-00034U-CS; Fri, 03 Mar 2017 07:19:51 -0500 Original-Received: from x2f43e1f.dyn.telefonica.de ([2.244.62.31]:57084 helo=lola) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cjmBa-00087G-LF; Fri, 03 Mar 2017 07:19:51 -0500 In-Reply-To: (Nala Ginrut's message of "Fri, 3 Mar 2017 19:30:26 +0800") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "guile-user" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:13387 Archived-At: Nala Ginrut writes: > On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:18 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > >> Frankly, I doubt that migration of large Python-based applications is >> going to be a thing when nobody can even be bothered with immersing >> himself in the problems with migrating LilyPond from Guile-1.8 to >> Guile-2. > > No, I don't think so. > If we have guile-python3, the migration work becomes attractive to > Guile community. Because each time you migrate a library, it can be > used in all languages implemented on Guile platform. The .go organization and call gate costs (for example constant string conversions) and memory organization and foreign string hardiness issues bogging down LilyPond will affect interfacing to every external library with a high call rate for processing. > I think the best way to push a community is to provide convenient way > to let users who care certain library to contribute it. But we don't > have it now. For example, the documentation or tools to help 1.8->2.0. > Python has tools for Python2->Python3 and documents for it. It is the > management of Guile community, not technical problem. Fortunately, > it's just management problem, and it's easier to improve than > technical one, only if we found a persistent way to push and there's > enough contributors. The technical problems won't go away by themselves. So which migration of a large Python-based application do you expect to become a thing without addressing significant amounts of technical problems first? Or how do I have to interpret your "No, I don't think so."? -- David Kastrup