[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Emacs and Guile

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: Emacs and Guile
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 13:09:40 +0300

> Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 10:26:11 +0200 (CEST)
> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden
> From: Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden>
> > FWIW, my (admittedly short) experience with Guile is that it is not
> > reliable or stable on anything but GNU/Linux, and even there it has
> > much to catch up.  It has a lot to gain in terms of portability
> > before it can be considered seriously as an alternative to ELisp, or
> > even its sibling on equal rights.  [...]
> We use it quite successfully in LilyPond which runs on Macs, Windows
> boxes, and various UNIX flavours.  Right now, we have about 1.3MByte
> of Scheme code.  This is Guile 1.8.x, but we are already in the
> process of migrating to 2.x.

2.x is quite different, I'm told.  My experience is with 2.x only.

> LilyPond binaries for Mac and Windows are cross-compiled on a
> GNU/Linux box.

I don't think this matters.  The problems I had were not with the
configury and the build procedure -- that worked pretty much
seamlessly.  The problem was with missing features on that are needed
for running the binaries on MS-Window.  Cross-compilation cannot fix

> So people working on a forthcoming Scheme support in Emacs might have
> a look at LilyPond.

Yes, by all means.  Any experience should be carefully studied.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]