This is the mail archive of the
cgen@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the CGEN project.
Re: Implementation Language
Ben Elliston writes:
> > [...] What's wrong exactly with the Guile implementation--if considered
> > as simply an implementation of R5RS?
>
> Nothing big AFAIK --- it's just tempting to depend on its extensions rather
> than using standard libraries like SLIB.
>
> I think it's simple: we need to resist such temptations and write in
> portable Scheme.
Modulo: we can write in C those parts we wish to
as long as a portable Scheme version also exists [e.g. cos.c,
not that I necessarily want to keep it in the long run,
but rather as an example of what I mean here.]
> Do we have any performance issues with Guile?
Yes!!!
> Personally, I'd like to see us keep it and refine what we have. As we know,
> rewrites are rarely a panacea. :-)
But they're fun. :-)
And after we have at least one more big usage under our belt
[dynamic compilation?] and we have a proper function unit description
[plus related paraphenalia] I think we should take a step back
and review everything from the ground up.