Re: emacs with guile instead of elisp

[mike@olan.com (Michael N. Livshin)]

Mikael Djurfeldt <mdj@nada.kth.se> writes:

> Regarding saving of Guile parse trees:
> 
> I've been thinking that if Guile is used as a scripting language in
> many applications, then it is a pity that only the C part can be
> reused (through the use of shared libraries).  I'd like the Scheme
> part to be shared as well.
> 
> How could we accomplish that?
> 
> One answer is: compile Scheme code into a shared library.
> 
> I've also been speculating about another alternative:
> 
> What about maintaining a common heap store which can be memory mapped
> read-only into a fixed address space of the process?
>
> [ snip ]
> 
> This idea could be tricky to realize but it might not be as
> fundamentally non-robust as one would expect since any attempt to
> modify store heap cells will lead to a memory exception and a normal
> error message.
> 
> Well, well, wild ideas...

Hmmm... I can't claim that I'm not speaking from my ass now, but this
sounds like RScheme, assuming their persistent store can hold closures.

OTOH, Rscheme is compiled to pseudo-code (not parse trees AFAIK), and
why shouldn't you be able to store arbitrary binary code in persistent
store? Need to look at this stuff closer...

(The compiled core images can be stored as is too, like in S48.  But than
they are non-sharable, right?)

> 
> /mdj

mike.