Re: State of LilyPond with Guile 2.2

[Thomas Morley]

Am So., 11. Apr. 2021 um 19:37 Uhr schrieb Jonas Hahnfeld via
Discussions on LilyPond development <lilypond-devel@gnu.org>:
>
> Am Sonntag, dem 11.04.2021 um 18:04 +0200 schrieb Han-Wen Nienhuys:
> > I wonder if it isn't more practical to fork guile 1.8, and stick it
> > into our tree as a submodule, and always build lilypond against the
> > in-tree version. We'd be up for the maintenance on the 1.8 branch, but
> > it might well be less work than keeping up with the churn that newer
> > GUILE versions bring us.
> >
>
> I had already replied that I don't like that option; it was always a
> given for me that LilyPond would move on. Guile 2.2 also makes binary
> distribution much nicer (because there no more shared srfi libraries,
> so lilypond can be linked as one static executable) and makes it
> possible to offer 64 bit executables for Windows.
>
> But given the reactions, I'll reduce activity on my work towards Guile
> 2.2...

Jonas,

once the startup delay and overall lower tempo is reduced to a
reasonable amount I'm for moving on to Guile-2, if not then Guile-3
(yes, I've read what you wrote about Guile-3).
Apart from the already mentioned unicode-thingy (admittedly the
strongest argument to move up, imho) there are also bug-fixes and new
functionality in newer guile-versions. The possibility to have 64 bit
executables for Windows is the overall strongest argument, I'd say.
I'd love to do my own tests etc, regrettable my spring-break is over.
I'll likely will have no time until next weekend.

Please, continue the work towards Guile-2/3

Best,
  Harm