geiser-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Geiser-users] Driving the disassembler from geiser a la slime


From: Richard M. Loveland
Subject: Re: [Geiser-users] Driving the disassembler from geiser a la slime
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 11:09:50 -0500

(forgot to cc the list, sorry jao for the resend!)

> "Jose A. Ortega Ruiz" <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > Hi Richard,
 
Hi jao!
 
> Indeed, i think it'd be a nice feature for geiser proper.  As you
> mention, the dissasembly functionality is even extensible to other
> implementations such as Guile.
>
> I think your diagnosis and proposed solutions are on the right track,
> and i'm happy to help to either help or review any patch you feel like
> submitting (github PRs, for instance), in case you think we should
> integrate them in "core geiser".

Very glad to hear!  I will try to put a patch together that adds the
disassembly support.

> By the way, what are your thoughts on integrating geiser-scsh in geiser?
> Or is geiser-scsh an "add-on" that one could install alongside the other
> implementations? If so, you could also maintain it as a separate
> package, but in that case it'd be very nice if it were available via an
> ELPA repo such as MELPA.

Ideally it would become part of geiser someday.  I think there are a few
issues that need to be handled first:

* It's not a complete geiser integration (no jump-to-source, who-calls,
  etc.).  I need to delve more into how the s48 byte-code compiler
  works, ask around on the s48 mailing list.

* There is a new version of scsh in development
  (https://github.com/scheme/scsh) that installs as an s48 library.
  Unfortunately, geiser-scsh only works with the last "official" release
  of scsh (0.6.7) at the moment.  I have been in contact with the
  developer of the new version and he tells me that if we can get geiser
  working with the latest s48 then the latest scsh will fall out of
  that.

I think your idea to maintain alongside geiser as an "add-on" is the
right one for the time being.  I'll look into getting it set up on
MELPA.

Thanks!
Rich



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]