Hi Christine,
On Friday, October 22, 2021 12:17 EDT, Christine Lemmer-Webber
wrote:
> Christine Lemmer-Webber writes:
> > I missed earlier in the thread that Gregg said that we should use
> > --disable-jit. Once I did that it was fine. So ignore this bit!
> >
> > - Christine
>
> It wasn't
Christine Lemmer-Webber writes:
> Well, *something* isn't ready to go:
>
> scheme@(guile-user)> (+ 1 2)
> $3 = 3
> scheme@(guile-user)> ,L elisp
> Happy hacking with Emacs Lisp! To switch back, type `,L scheme'.
> elisp@(guile-user)> (+ 1 2)
> $4 = 3
> elisp@(guile-user)> (cons 'foo '())
> $25
Christine Lemmer-Webber writes:
> Christine Lemmer-Webber writes:
>
>> Well, *something* isn't ready to go:
>>
>> scheme@(guile-user)> (+ 1 2)
>> $3 = 3
>> scheme@(guile-user)> ,L elisp
>> Happy hacking with Emacs Lisp! To switch back, type `,L scheme'.
>> elisp@(guile-user)> (+ 1 2)
>> $4 = 3
Robin Templeton writes:
> Christine Lemmer-Webber writes:
>
>> Ludovic Courtès writes:
>>
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>> Christine Lemmer-Webber skribis:
>>>
I've pushed this as origin/wip-elisp-rebased. I actually rebased it
again, making some naming adjustments for myself and a couple of
Christine Lemmer-Webber writes:
> Ludovic Courtès writes:
>
>> Hello!
>>
>> Christine Lemmer-Webber skribis:
>>
>>> I've pushed this as origin/wip-elisp-rebased. I actually rebased it
>>> again, making some naming adjustments for myself and a couple of
>>> adjustments having talked to Robin.
"Gregg Sangster" writes:
> Hello,
>
> I have wip-elisp rebased all the way up to main as of a few days ago
> (e60469c8b6936575c079faaffa40a340e1d49f3c) plus two changes from
> Ricardo. It's available here:
>
> https://git.sr.ht/~g20r/guile
>
> There is one test failure in "make check" on
Hi Gregg,
On Thursday, October 14, 2021 13:34 EDT, Ricardo Wurmus
wrote:
I also had he same experience. Guile Emacs would segfault very
quickly. That’s why I started a rebase on top of the nearest
Emacs release, which is 25.2. I had to abandon the rebase,
because after about 45
Christine Lemmer-Webber writes:
> Ludovic Courtès writes:
>
>> Hello!
>>
>> Christine Lemmer-Webber skribis:
>>
>>> I've pushed this as origin/wip-elisp-rebased. I actually rebased it
>>> again, making some naming adjustments for myself and a couple of
>>> adjustments having talked to Robin.
"Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide" writes:
> The workload to finish this is considerable, though: IIRC You’ll need to
> solve some deeper problems that prevent Guile Emacs from using
> byte-compiled files (that’s why it currently has a very high startup
> time).
To clarify, Guile-Emacs intentionally
"Gregg Sangster" writes:
> Hello Guile Hackers,
>
> I've rebased the wip-elisp branch on top of commit
> 449f50dd84a081aea16ef678e32bf37abe429ff6 (git describe:
> v3.0.4-64-g33232cb5c4). It's published here:
>
> https://git.sr.ht/~g20r/guile
This is wonderful, thank you! (IIUC, Christine and
Hi Ricardo,
On Thursday, October 14, 2021 13:34 EDT, Ricardo Wurmus
wrote:
> I also had he same experience. Guile Emacs would segfault very
> quickly. That’s why I started a rebase on top of the nearest
> Emacs release, which is 25.2. I had to abandon the rebase,
> because after about 45
Hi Christine,
Thanks for looking at this! I just noticed that my email address as the
committer on 1ba3d7854cac0524f80d3c6113da770505c9eda9 is incorrect. Before
merging, can you please change it to gr...@thesangsters.ca?
On Tuesday, October 19, 2021 17:59 EDT, Christine Lemmer-Webber
Christine Lemmer-Webber writes:
> Ludovic Courtès writes:
>
>> Hello!
>>
>> Christine Lemmer-Webber skribis:
>>
>>> I've pushed this as origin/wip-elisp-rebased. I actually rebased it
>>> again, making some naming adjustments for myself and a couple of
>>> adjustments having talked to Robin.
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> Hello!
>
> Christine Lemmer-Webber skribis:
>
>> I've pushed this as origin/wip-elisp-rebased. I actually rebased it
>> again, making some naming adjustments for myself and a couple of
>> adjustments having talked to Robin.
>>
>> If nobody objects, I'd like to merge
Hello!
Christine Lemmer-Webber skribis:
> I've pushed this as origin/wip-elisp-rebased. I actually rebased it
> again, making some naming adjustments for myself and a couple of
> adjustments having talked to Robin.
>
> If nobody objects, I'd like to merge this into main. Maintainers, if
> you
I've pushed this as origin/wip-elisp-rebased. I actually rebased it
again, making some naming adjustments for myself and a couple of
adjustments having talked to Robin.
If nobody objects, I'd like to merge this into main. Maintainers, if
you have any objections, speak now or forever hold these
This is awesome.
So, what's stopping us from merging this into guile main now before it
bitrots again? :)
"Gregg Sangster" writes:
> Hi Ricardo,
>
> Thanks, your changes fixed a couple of the test errors I saw.
>
> On Monday, September 13, 2021 06:56 EDT, Ricardo Wurmus
> wrote:
>
>>
Hi Gregg,
"Gregg Sangster" writes:
I have wip-elisp rebased all the way up to main as of a few days
ago (e60469c8b6936575c079faaffa40a340e1d49f3c) plus two changes
from Ricardo. It's available here:
https://git.sr.ht/~g20r/guile
Excellent!
There is one test failure in "make check" on
Hello,
I have wip-elisp rebased all the way up to main as of a few days ago
(e60469c8b6936575c079faaffa40a340e1d49f3c) plus two changes from Ricardo. It's
available here:
https://git.sr.ht/~g20r/guile
There is one test failure in "make check" on test-out-of-memory. I haven't
investigated
Hi Ricardo,
Thanks, your changes fixed a couple of the test errors I saw.
On Monday, September 13, 2021 06:56 EDT, Ricardo Wurmus
wrote:
>
> Hi Gregg,
>
> > I've rebased the wip-elisp branch on top of commit
> > 449f50dd84a081aea16ef678e32bf37abe429ff6 (git describe:
> >
Hello,
Just my 2 cents as a drive-by watcher: I agree that having wip-elisp branch in
guile tree would be nice to have, this way it's easier to find out where
progress is being made for this endeavour, with potentially a checked out TODO
or TASKS file to see if I can ever help (if only with
Hi Gregg,
I've rebased the wip-elisp branch on top of commit
449f50dd84a081aea16ef678e32bf37abe429ff6 (git describe:
v3.0.4-64-g33232cb5c4). It's published here:
https://git.sr.ht/~g20r/guile
FWIW I had also rebased wip-elisp in 2020:
"Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide" writes:
> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
> Hello Gregg,
> "Gregg Sangster" writes:
>
>> I've rebased the wip-elisp branch on top of commit
>> 449f50dd84a081aea16ef678e32bf37abe429ff6 (git describe:
>> v3.0.4-64-g33232cb5c4). It's published here:
>>
>>
Hello Gregg,
"Gregg Sangster" writes:
> I've rebased the wip-elisp branch on top of commit
> 449f50dd84a081aea16ef678e32bf37abe429ff6 (git describe:
> v3.0.4-64-g33232cb5c4). It's published here:
>
> https://git.sr.ht/~g20r/guile
I’m not a Guile core developer, but I think that this is
Hello Guile Hackers,
I've rebased the wip-elisp branch on top of commit
449f50dd84a081aea16ef678e32bf37abe429ff6 (git describe: v3.0.4-64-g33232cb5c4).
It's published here:
https://git.sr.ht/~g20r/guile
There are two additional failed tests which appear to be new tests added since
the last
Hello Guile Hackers,
I've rebased the wip-elisp branch on top of commit
449f50dd84a081aea16ef678e32bf37abe429ff6 (git describe: v3.0.4-64-g33232cb5c4).
It's published here:
https://git.sr.ht/~g20r/guile
There are two additional failed tests which appear to be new tests added since
the last
Hello Guile Hackers,
I've rebased the wip-elisp branch on top of commit
449f50dd84a081aea16ef678e32bf37abe429ff6 (git describe: v3.0.4-64-g33232cb5c4).
It's published here:
https://git.sr.ht/~g20r/guile
There are two additional failed tests which appear to be new tests added since
the last
27 matches
Mail list logo
