[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: guile-vm 0.4
From: |
Keisuke Nishida |
Subject: |
Re: guile-vm 0.4 |
Date: |
Fri, 13 Apr 2001 07:21:58 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Wanderlust/2.4.0 (Rio) SEMI/1.13.7 (Awazu) FLIM/1.13.2 (Kasanui) Emacs/21.0.102 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) |
At 13 Apr 2001 10:15:08 +0100,
Neil Jerram wrote:
>
> Keisuke> Just loading it without `compile-file' would mean
> Keisuke> compiling it on memory without writing. Without
> Keisuke> compilation, my VM cannot execute it.
>
> Now I'm confused. Earlier you said that, if your VM found the
> expression (load "foo.scm") somewhere in the module that it was
> compiling, it would simply invoke `load' as a procedure, and then
> `load' would do its own non-VM thing.
Sorry, I meant that `load' *could* compile the source file
some time in the future. We could redefine `load' so that
it always compiles files. Right now, I haven't redefined
`load' but done `require'; that's why only `require' compiles
files.
I don't think the current behavior is the right way. If we
are going to replace the current evaluator by a VM, we need
to compile every file.
Regards,
Keisuke
- Re: guile-vm 0.4, (continued)
- Re: guile-vm 0.4, Rob Browning, 2001/04/11
- Re: guile-vm 0.4, Keisuke Nishida, 2001/04/11
- Re: guile-vm 0.4, Rob Browning, 2001/04/11
- Re: guile-vm 0.4, Keisuke Nishida, 2001/04/11
- Re: guile-vm 0.4, Rob Browning, 2001/04/12
- Re: guile-vm 0.4, Michael Livshin, 2001/04/12
- Re: guile-vm 0.4, Rob Browning, 2001/04/12
- Re: guile-vm 0.4, Keisuke Nishida, 2001/04/12
- Re: guile-vm 0.4, Rob Browning, 2001/04/12
- Re: guile-vm 0.4, Neil Jerram, 2001/04/13
- Re: guile-vm 0.4,
Keisuke Nishida <=
- Re: guile-vm 0.4, Keisuke Nishida, 2001/04/12
- Re: guile-vm 0.4, Rob Browning, 2001/04/12
- Re: guile-vm 0.4, Keisuke Nishida, 2001/04/12
- Re: guile-vm 0.4, Rob Browning, 2001/04/12