[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Guile 3 and wip-elisp/Emacs

From: Gregg Sangster
Subject: Re: Guile 3 and wip-elisp/Emacs
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 16:01:33 +0200
User-agent: SOGoMail 5.2.0


I have wip-elisp rebased all the way up to main as of a few days ago 
(e60469c8b6936575c079faaffa40a340e1d49f3c) plus two changes from Ricardo.  It's 
available here:

There is one test failure in "make check" on test-out-of-memory.  I haven't 
investigated it yet but I get the same failure on main.  If that's not an 
expected failure, it might be a problem with my environment.

There is also an emacs repo here:

which uses the 3.0-based wip-elisp.  It builds and runs but segfaults easily.  
I've started rebasing it on a more current emacs.  Those changes aren't 
published yet.

I haven't been able to get the guile-emacs package in guix working.  The build 
gets stuck at collecting/processing OKURI-NASI entries after a few hours.  For 
comparison, the 3.0-based guile-emacs builds in about 20 minutes on my machine. 
 If anyone has that running, it would be nice to have a comparison of the 
build/run speed.

On Sunday, September 12, 2021 22:13 EDT, Christine Lemmer-Webber 
<> wrote:

> "Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide" <> writes:
> > [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
> > Hello Gregg,
> > "Gregg Sangster" <> writes:
> >
> >> I've rebased the wip-elisp branch on top of commit
> >> 449f50dd84a081aea16ef678e32bf37abe429ff6 (git describe:
> >> v3.0.4-64-g33232cb5c4).  It's published here:
> >>
> >>
> >
> > I’m not a Guile core developer, but I think that this is awesome!
> >
> >> My question is if this is worthwhile work?  I don't have much time to
> >> spend on it but am happy to keep hacking away if there's still
> >> upstream interest.
> >
> > I think that there is upstream interest in Guile to improve the elisp
> > implementation, but I’m not sure about Emacs. They added improvements to
> > elisp that also provide better performance and they keep improving their
> > elisp implementation.
> I would personally think it would be good if we could get the wip-elisp
> branch merged.  It would be good not to bitrot.  It seems more likely to
> survive if it gets included in emacs proper.
> > That said: Tools like fibers would be great to have in Emacs.
> >
> > The workload to finish this is considerable, though: IIRC You’ll need to
> > solve some deeper problems that prevent Guile Emacs from using
> > byte-compiled files (that’s why it currently has a very high startup
> > time).
> >
> > That said, there is a guile-emacs package in guix, and Guile 3.0.7 is
> > much faster than Guile 2.
> Yes, to complete *guile-emacs*... that will be a lot of work.  But it
> will be less work if guile's elisp branch is no longer this separate
> thing that isn't kept up to date with the rest of guile.  More likely
> that someone could finish and pick it up.
> > (please someone correct me if I’m wrong!)
> >
> > Best wishes,
> > Arne

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]