On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 3:19 PM Jonas Hahnfeld <hah...@hahnjo.de> wrote: > > On Wed, 2024-02-07 at 09:19 -0500, Thompson, David wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 5:40 AM Jonas Hahnfeld via Developers list for > > Guile, the GNU extensibility library <guile-devel@gnu.org> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 2023-11-28 at 22:04 +0100, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote: > > > > > > > > Ping, any comments on this approach? I built binaries for LilyPond > > > > 2.25.10 using these patches applied on top of Guile 3.0.9 and the > > > > result seems to work fine on Windows. > > > > > > Another ping; meanwhile we switched to building the official binaries > > > of LilyPond with Guile 3.0 starting from version 2.25.11, but it would > > > be really great to get rid of our downstream patches... > > > > Just chiming in to say this is a very exciting development that I had > > missed when the patch set was first sent! > > > > Does this allow a fully featured Guile build or are some things still > > disabled? Does JIT work? > > It's functional enough to run LilyPond (which uses quite a bit of > Guile) and well enough so that there is only one complaint (that I know > of so far) about multiplication with negative numbers not working > right. If I remember correctly from quickly having a look, that's > related to scm_integer_mul_ii using long_magnitude which doesn't quite > work on Windows 64-bit. For LilyPond, we disable some features (JIT, > threading, networking; you can look at the full build recipe here: > https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/blob/master/release/binaries/lib/dependencies.py#L628 > ) and I don't know which of these would work or how much it would take > to support them.
Ah, bummer. That's a lot of disabled features. JIT and threads are must-haves for my use-cases. I guess I'll continue waiting for someone to figure out how to build a fully featured Guile on Windows. Any takers? ;) - Dave
