Re: GNU Guile 3.0.0 released and some suggestions for future GNU TeXmacs
Massimiliano Gubinelli <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.editors.texmacs.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Last year I experimented a lot with a Guile 2 port. As soon as you have some time you could give it a look and we could try to use it as a blueprint for a Guile 3 port. Maybe the JIT will make it possible to disable compilation of the files (which is where I currently experience most of the bugs) since eval in Guile 3 is as fast as in Guile 1.8 (as they say). Of course compilation (if we can make it work) will make bootstrap faster, which would be a great plus. Max > On 26. Jan 2020, at 09:49, TeXmacs <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 11:45:08AM +0100, Massimiliano Gubinelli wrote: >> 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? > > Since we use Guile as an extension language, > we tend to switch to C++ whenever performance is an issue. > In the past, I rewrote some document search routines in C++ for this reason. > > The only serious problem that I had with Guile was the time to boot all files. > This prompted me to write all the lazy initialization stuff... > and that is precisely what is getting into our way if we now > want to move to Guile 2/3... > > 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