Re: [r6rs-discuss] Implementors' intentions concerning R6RS

[Julian Graham]

> From the recent experiments vs. Boehm GC, my impression was that
> Guile's GC is already pretty good and that there is little scope for
> improvement here.

Really?  My (extremely unscientific) experiments were showing
something like <10ms for C->Guile calls that didn't involve GC, and
~100ms for ones that did.


> > * Not related to 1.9 itself, but maybe a cleanup / redesign of the web
> > page,
>
> Yes, in principle.  Needs someone to volunteer though.

It might be worthwhile to put out a call to the GNU webmasters.  Or
just post an ad on Savannah -- I actually got several responses to
something I posted looking for testers for SDOM, which has about zero
name recognition.  I bet lots of people would be interested in getting
a chance to redesign Guile's page.


> Yes, that would be nice.  Except I'm not keen on following Microsoft
> "standards".  Java VM and/or Parrot (is that still happening?) would
> be fine.

Parrot had a new release two days ago.  Whether they're still on
peoples' minds (and whether they're still gonna host Perl6), I dunno.