Re: Guile news for the GNU Status Report
Hi Neil, Thanks for your feedback. Neil Jerram n...@ossau.uklinux.net writes: Guile 2.0 is a breakthrough in Guile's history. First and foremost, it is based on a compiler and a virtual machine. The compiler compiles Scheme code to bytecode, applying well-known optimizations. As a result, Scheme code runs noticeably faster with Guile 2.0. Compilation can occur transparently: when the compiled form of a module is not found in cache, it is automatically compiled before being run. People might assume that this means Guile is now less supporting of interactive programming than in previous releases. I think it would be worth adding a sentence to clarify that this is not the case. Perhaps Note that Guile still supports interactive programming, i.e. modifying code in running programs, just as extensively as it has in previous releases. In the meantime I had changed this paragraph to mention the REPL and debugger: Guile 2.0 is a breakthrough in Guile's history. First and foremost, it is based on a compiler and a virtual machine, and comes with a powerful read-eval-print loop (REPL) and debugger. The compiler compiles Scheme code to bytecode, blah blah blah How does this address your concern? Normally the status report should have been published by now, but it hasn’t, so I may/might still be able to change it. Thanks, Ludo’.
Re: rfi: hash set
Hi Noah! Noah Lavine noah.b.lav...@gmail.com writes: I started looking into implementing this, and I ran into something strange that I'd like clarification on. Am I correct in saying that currently, hash tables can only shrink by one size index when they are rehashed? Yes, your analysis looks correct to me. Would you like to look into fixing this? :-) I suppose the trick would be to regularly recompile ‘min_size_index’ based on the current ‘SCM_HASHTABLE_N_ITEMS’, iterating on HASHTABLE_SIZE, starting from the current ‘min_size_index’. Thanks, Ludo’.
Re: PEG Parser
Hi! Thanks for looking into this! Perhaps Andy has some insight to share, too? Noah Lavine noah.b.lav...@gmail.com writes: First of all, it passes its test suite. This is pretty good, because its test suite includes a grammar for itself, a grammar for basic mathematical equations, and a grammar for parsing /etc/passwd files. These all seem like good examples of things you'd want to parse. While these are nice, small unit tests targeting specific parts of PEG would seem useful to me, as in the rest of Guile. This may not be blocking, though. [...] The only thing that seemed really weird is the macro safe-bind, which basically reimplements hygienic macros. It's used all over the place in the function-generating code. I also saw a couple of lines that were too long, but not many, and the whole thing could be split into a few modules, but it's not that long the way it is, so neither of those seem like big issues. It could also stand to have a bigger test suite (as the test suite itself says). “./check-guile --coverage peg.test” can be used to measure code coverage, normally. I agree that PEG could be useful. Thanks, Ludo’.
Re: Sputnik test result (was Re: ECMAScript support broken?)
Hi, Thanks for looking into this! Noah Lavine noah.b.lav...@gmail.com writes: The attached patch should add support for ECMAScript unicode literals. I applied this one, along with corresponding test cases. Can you please resubmit the remaining patches with test case(s) for each, and each in a thread of its own? Thanks, Ludo’.
