[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Guile 3 and wip-elisp/Emacs

From: Christine Lemmer-Webber
Subject: Re: Guile 3 and wip-elisp/Emacs
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2021 22:13:40 -0400
User-agent: mu4e 1.6.2; emacs 27.2

"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]