Re: Blockers for Guile 2.2

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

On Sun, Feb 27, 2022 at 12:31 AM Jean Abou Samra <jean@abou-samra.fr> wrote:
> > I never said I don't want to fix Guile 2.2 bugs, and you should know
> > as I spent lots and lots of time debugging #6218.  I also said I
> > support moving CI to 2.2, so any MR would pass against 2.2.
> >
> > I am just asking to not drop 1.8 support.
> >
> > Most of the work we do isn't actually about Guile anyway,
> >
> > $ git log --since 2022/01/01 | grep ^commit|wc
> >      257     514   12336
> > $ git log  --grep=[Gg]uile --since 2022/01/01 | grep ^commit|wc
> >        7      14     336
>
> I agree that the version-specific code we have (cond-expand
> and GUILEV2) isn't all that much. On the other hand, I would
> be glad to be able to use Guile 2 features, such as Unicode
> support, when and unless, (srfi srfi-71) (let and let*
> accepting multiple values), S-expression comments,
> scm_c_bind_keyword_arguments, and a few others. Now
> that my principal concern with the sustainability of
> Guile 2 binaries (shipping bytecode with them) is cleared,
> I have mixed feelings about when to leave Guile 1 behind.

You say you have mixed feelings, but I think (with your updates to
compilation), those feelings are ever less mixed?

> In my previous post I showed that compiling all Scheme
> files can be done in 20s with Guile 2 (so a few seconds
> for a single file), and 4s with Guile 3 (so near instant
> for one file). Would that address your concern with
> compilation speed?

Thanks a ton for your investigation into this. This is a game changer:

MSDM-reduced

1.8: real 0m14.788s
2.2: real 0m14.648s

les-nereides:

1.8: real 0m1.376s
2.2: real 0m1.224s

Let's kill 1.8 support.

-- 
Han-Wen Nienhuys - hanwenn@gmail.com - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen