Re: Guile 2 (was: Cairo plans)

[Jonas Hahnfeld]

Am Montag, dem 30.08.2021 um 20:01 +0200 schrieb Jean Abou Samra:
> > I would highly prefer to not mix switching the default backend with
> > switching to Guile 2.2 that will already be disruptive enough (yes,
> > it's going slower than I had hoped...).
> 
> 
> At the moment, I have trouble seeing how Guile 2 could be made to
> work well. The absence of error locations is a source of frustration.
> My understanding is that this is a design limitation of Guile 2 and
> later when interpreting code (as opposed to byte-compiling).

Hm, when Harm brought up this point in the previous thread in May, I
did not understand this to be a critical showstopper for adoption of
Guile 2.2 (is it?) or I would have prioritized this over working on the
new infrastructure to compile binaries.

IIRC Harm's comments were mostly about not confusing the average user
with ugly backtraces of Scheme internals - which was solved some time
ago by only enabling them in debug mode. For the error locations, I had
some WIP solution for ~80% of the cases (typos and wrong argument
types) by installing a custom exception handler and manually adding the
location information of where the parsed code came from. I had hoped to
revisit this approach over the weekend, but it didn't happen. I cannot
foresee when I will have time for this, but just to let people know
that I don't think all hope is lost here.

Jonas

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part