On Sun, 2013-09-01 at 13:12 +0200, Andy Wingo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We have a bit too much on our plates ATM to think about native
> compilation. However, "what's the plan" is a common question. So here
> is a tentative plan. Sometime after 2.2 settles down would be the time
> to look at it. It wou
Hi,
To note in e.g. logic programming one can inline a lot of code and
the final result of peval is that it will and should not expand the lambdas
at site
due to code explosion. What happens now, as I understand, is that closures
are created at a resulting quite hefty overhead. In stead if one emp
Hi Andy,
All of this stuff sounds great, and I can't wait for it to be available!
Can I please request an addition to your to-do list: a document that
explains what changes to libguile-using programs will be required?
Getting people from 1.8 to 2.0 is hard enough, and soon Guile will be
*two* majo
Hi,
We have a bit too much on our plates ATM to think about native
compilation. However, "what's the plan" is a common question. So here
is a tentative plan. Sometime after 2.2 settles down would be the time
to look at it. It would probably be Guile 3.0. Dunno.
The way to do it is to refacto
Hi!
So, the RTL VM and the CPS compiler landed. I think the consensus is
that Guile 2.2 is basically what's in master, all compiled to RTL.
Anything else we manage to get in is great but that's the fundamental
bit.
To that end, we should start to think about what is necessary to finish
the job,
