Re: What's the current recommendation for speeding up bits of guile code.

[Rob Browning]

Martin Grabmueller <address@hidden> writes:

> > From: Rob Browning <address@hidden>
> > Date: 20 Mar 2001 15:58:49 -0600

> > Should this go into CVS?

Note lest anyone be confused, I wasn't suggesting that hobbit go in to
guile-core, just asking if my fixes should go into guile-comp (the
guile hobbit CVS module) that's already there.

> I am quite interested in that module.  What is currently possible
> with it?  I suppose you can compile self-contained Scheme source
> files to C.  Can you build shared objects, which can then be loaded
> dynamically, just like hand-coded C modules?

In theory, yes.  Right now all I have working is the command-line
script, ghobbit which uses ghobbit.scm to create a .h and .c file from
a given .scm file.

The compile.scm script is the one that should let you say:

  (compile "tempfile" '(module name) some-func some-other-func)

and have it generate a .so and immediately link it back in.  That's
presuming I understand it right.  However, I'm still trying to figure
out why the dynamic-link (and libtool operations) are not quite
working right...

> I think this would be quite useful, even if there is no support for
> the current module system, because we could code quite a lot of code
> (such as the SRFIs) in Scheme, compile them to machine code and then
> load them via Scheme modules.

Well, I'm going to spend a little more time on this, and if I can get
it working, we'll probably start testing it in gnucash immediately.

-- 
Rob Browning <address@hidden> PGP=E80E0D04F521A094 532B97F5D64E3930