[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Compilation to js [Update]
From: |
Arne Babenhauserheide |
Subject: |
Re: Compilation to js [Update] |
Date: |
Tue, 20 Jun 2017 22:48:41 +0200 |
User-agent: |
mu4e 0.9.18; emacs 25.2.1 |
Hi Ian,
Ian Price <address@hidden> writes:
> I think the approach using the dominator functions in (language cps
> utils) is the right way, and is giving the results I want. I intend to
> write a blog post shortly explaining how dominators / cps-soup work
> and how to compile from it for other people who may be interested in
> these low level guile details.
That sounds great!
> That said, you can take some scheme files and compile them with the
> usual functions, e.g.
>
> (compile-file "/tmp/foo.scm" #:to 'javascript #:output-file "/tmp/foo.js")
Is there already a clean way to run javascript functions from scheme —
for example accessing the DOM? That would directly allow pure Guile web
development.
> What's next? Number 2 on my list from last time was
>> Complete porting boot-9 to js (in particular, the guile module system)
> so this is what I intend to do. This will allow us to run much more
> complicated programs, and you won't need to keep reimplementing
> functions like map.
>
> Another issue is with macros, which are not being residualised now
> that their representation was changed, so I'll do that too.
What does residualization of macros mean? (I feel I’m missing language here).
Best wishes,
Arne
--
Unpolitisch sein
heißt politisch sein
ohne es zu merken
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature