|
From: | Ken Raeburn |
Subject: | Re: Why Emacs should have a good web-browser |
Date: | Mon, 13 Jul 2009 03:18:43 -0400 |
On Jul 11, 2009, at 16:24, Stefan Monnier wrote:
The Emacs/W3 way is sadly unworkable because of the amount of effort this requires (compounded by the performance limitations of Elisp).
Guile has had some performance work done lately, and has a bytecode engine of its own; no JIT compilation to machine code yet, but people are certainly keeping it in mind. I don't know how the ECMAScript performance compares to a random browser's Javascript engine currently, and (according to http://wingolog.org/archives/2009/02/22/ecmascript-for-guile though maybe things have changed) I guess Andy Wingo doesn't either. But the ECMAScript support is a second language reader for the compiler, so when the Scheme compilation and optimization support improves, so should the ECMAScript support.
Ken
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |