Re: GNU Guile 3.0.0 released and some suggestions for future GNU TeXmacs

It would be good to have an automatic test-suite to evaluate seriously the performance issues involved in this choice, also in the perspective to understand what would be the margin of advantage to adapt the codebase to Guile 3. 

Do you have some ideas of which areas involve Guile performances seriously? 

Max



> On 25. Jan 2020, at 06:11, TeXmacs <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 06:18:53PM +0100, Massimiliano Gubinelli wrote:
>> I???ve just tried and TeXmacs runs fine with Guile 1.6.8 on my MacBook Air (Catilina).
>> 
>> I wonder what, from our point of view, is the substantial difference between 1.6 and 1.8. The advantage of 1.6 is that essentially requires no other library, while 1.8 has a host of dependencies (which however are standard, so not much of an issue on Linux).
> 
> If my memory is right, there have not been many improvements between the two versions
> from our point of view.  There are a few more features (e.g. charsets; I still have
> to adapt some of Miguel's and Grégoire's code because of that).  Maybe speed?
> That would require some serious testing.
> 
> On the other hand, Guile 1.6 clearly has the advantage of being closer to
> the initial concept of a light-weight extension language.  The dependencies
> may be standard, but they made it impossible to compile Guile on two Linux
> machines at SFU within a reasonable amount of time.  This may be due to
> the fact that the dependencies evolve, so we would have to maintain
> the interfaces with all these evolutions.
> 
> For these reasons, it seems to me that version 1.6.8 is the safest choice.
> 
> Best wishes, --Joris
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Texmacs-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev


_______________________________________________
Texmacs-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev