Re: [VM] Should `compile' always be visible?

[Andy Wingo]

Yo,

On Tue 24 Feb 2009 00:44, address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

>> Yeah, dunno. It would be great to have `compile' in the toplevel
>> environment. OTOH it takes time.
>
> Just to be clear: I wasn't so much concerned about load time, but rather
> about namespace pollution and fuzzy dependencies ("ambient authority").
> Why add yet another set of global bindings if we can avoid it?

OK. Still I feel that it would be great to have `compile' and
`compile-file' available in the default environment -- they're in the
same category as `load', `eval', etc. It would also be good for scripts.
But I could be convinced otherwise :)

>> This is all on my laptop running at full speed, an average over 10 runs.
>
> Is it when running `pre-inst-guile', the Libtool-generated `guile'
> script, or the raw `guile' executable?

The 1.8 results were against the Fedora guile, and the vm results
against libguile/.libs/lt-guile, run inside pre-inst-guile-env.

> I agree that `syncase' should be loaded by default now that we no
> longer have to worry about its execution time.

Great. We'll have to document syntax-rules at least in the manual
though, and we should document syntax-case too. Not that that should
block their inclusion.

Andy
-- 
http://wingolog.org/