@c -*-texinfo-*- | |
@c This is part of the GNU Guile Reference Manual. | |
@c Copyright (C) 2008, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2018, 2020 | |
@c Free Software Foundation, Inc. | |
@c See the file guile.texi for copying conditions. | |
@node History | |
@section A Brief History of Guile | |
Guile is an artifact of historical processes, both as code and as a | |
community of hackers. It is sometimes useful to know this history when | |
hacking the source code, to know about past decisions and future | |
directions. | |
Of course, the real history of Guile is written by the hackers hacking | |
and not the writers writing, so we round up the section with a note on | |
current status and future directions. | |
@menu | |
* The Emacs Thesis:: | |
* Early Days:: | |
* A Scheme of Many Maintainers:: | |
* A Timeline of Selected Guile Releases:: | |
* Status:: | |
@end menu | |
@node The Emacs Thesis | |
@subsection The Emacs Thesis | |
The story of Guile is the story of bringing the development experience | |
of Emacs to the mass of programs on a GNU system. | |
Emacs, when it was first created in its GNU form in 1984, was a new | |
take on the problem of ``how to make a program''. The Emacs thesis is | |
that it is delightful to create composite programs based on an | |
orthogonal kernel written in a low-level language together with a | |
powerful, high-level extension language. | |
Extension languages foster extensible programs, programs which adapt | |
readily to different users and to changing times. Proof of this can be | |
seen in Emacs' current and continued existence, spanning more than a | |
quarter-century. | |
Besides providing for modification of a program by others, extension | |
languages are good for @emph{intension} as well. Programs built in | |
``the Emacs way'' are pleasurable and easy for their authors to flesh | |
out with the features that they need. | |
After the Emacs experience was appreciated more widely, a number of | |
hackers started to consider how to spread this experience to the rest | |
of the GNU system. It was clear that the easiest way to Emacsify a | |
program would be to embed a shared language implementation into it. | |
@node Early Days | |
@subsection Early Days | |
Tom Lord was the first to fully concentrate his efforts on an | |
embeddable language runtime, which he named ``GEL'', the GNU Extension | |
Language. | |
GEL was the product of converting SCM, Aubrey Jaffer's implementation | |
of Scheme, into something more appropriate to embedding as a library. | |
(SCM was itself based on an implementation by George Carrette, SIOD.) | |
Lord managed to convince Richard Stallman to dub GEL the official | |
extension language for the GNU project. It was a natural fit, given | |
that Scheme was a cleaner, more modern Lisp than Emacs Lisp. Part of | |
the argument was that eventually when GEL became more capable, it | |
could gain the ability to execute other languages, especially Emacs | |
Lisp. | |
Due to a naming conflict with another programming language, Lee Thomas | |
suggested a new name for GEL: ``Guile''. Besides being a recursive | |
acronym, ``Guile'' craftily follows the naming of its ancestors, | |
``Planner'', ``Conniver'', and ``Schemer''. (The latter was truncated | |
to ``Scheme'' due to a 6-character file name limit on an old operating | |
system.) Finally, ``Guile'' suggests ``guy-ell'', or ``Guy L. | |
Steele'', who, together with Gerald Sussman, originally discovered | |
Scheme. | |
Around the same time that Guile (then GEL) was readying itself for | |
public release, another extension language was gaining in popularity, | |
Tcl. Many developers found advantages in Tcl because of its shell-like | |
syntax and its well-developed graphical widgets library, Tk. Also, at | |
the time there was a large marketing push promoting Tcl as a | |
``universal extension language''. | |
Richard Stallman, as the primary author of GNU Emacs, had a particular | |
vision of what extension languages should be, and Tcl did not seem to | |
him to be as capable as Emacs Lisp. He posted a criticism to the | |
comp.lang.tcl newsgroup, sparking one of the internet's legendary | |
flamewars. As part of these discussions, retrospectively dubbed the | |
``Tcl Wars'', he announced the Free Software Foundation's intent to | |
promote Guile as the extension language for the GNU project. | |
It is a common misconception that Guile was created as a reaction to | |
Tcl. While it is true that the public announcement of Guile happened | |
at the same time as the ``Tcl wars'', Guile was created out of a | |
condition that existed outside the polemic. Indeed, the need for a | |
powerful language to bridge the gap between extension of existing | |
applications and a more fully dynamic programming environment is still | |
with us today. | |
@node A Scheme of Many Maintainers | |
@subsection A Scheme of Many Maintainers | |
Surveying the field, it seems that Scheme implementations correspond | |
with their maintainers on an N-to-1 relationship. That is to say, that | |
those people that implement Schemes might do so on a number of | |
occasions, but that the lifetime of a given Scheme is tied to the | |
maintainership of one individual. | |
Guile is atypical in this regard. | |
Tom Lord maintained Guile for its first year and a half or so, | |
corresponding to the end of 1994 through the middle of 1996. The | |
releases made in this time constitute an arc from SCM as a standalone | |
program to Guile as a reusable, embeddable library, but passing | |
through a explosion of features: embedded Tcl and Tk, a toolchain for | |
compiling and disassembling Java, addition of a C-like syntax, | |
creation of a module system, and a start at a rich POSIX interface. | |
Only some of those features remain in Guile. There were ongoing | |
tensions between providing a small, embeddable language, and one which | |
had all of the features (e.g.@: a graphical toolkit) that a modern Emacs | |
might need. In the end, as Guile gained in uptake, the development | |
team decided to focus on depth, documentation and orthogonality rather | |
than on breadth. This has been the focus of Guile ever since, although | |
there is a wide range of third-party libraries for Guile. | |
Jim Blandy presided over that period of stabilization, in the three | |
years until the end of 1999, when he too moved on to other projects. | |
Since then, Guile has had a group maintainership. The first group was | |
Maciej Stachowiak, Mikael Djurfeldt, and Marius Vollmer, with Vollmer | |
staying on the longest. By late 2007, Marius had mostly moved on to | |
other things, so Neil Jerram and Ludovic Court@`es stepped up to take on | |
the primary maintenance responsibility. Neil and Ludovic were joined by | |
Andy Wingo in late 2009, allowing Neil to step away, and Mark Weaver | |
joined shortly thereafter. After spending more than 5 years in the | |
role, Mark stepped down as well, leaving Ludovic and Andy as the current | |
co-maintainers of Guile as of January 2020. | |
Of course, a large part of the actual work on Guile has come from | |
other contributors too numerous to mention, but without whom the world | |
would be a poorer place. | |
@node A Timeline of Selected Guile Releases | |
@subsection A Timeline of Selected Guile Releases | |
@table @asis | |
@item guile-i --- 4 February 1995 | |
SCM, turned into a library. | |
@item guile-ii --- 6 April 1995 | |
A low-level module system was added. Tcl/Tk support was added, | |
allowing extension of Scheme by Tcl or vice versa. POSIX support was | |
improved, and there was an experimental stab at Java integration. | |
@item guile-iii --- 18 August 1995 | |
The C-like syntax, ctax, was improved, but mostly this release | |
featured a start at the task of breaking Guile into pieces. | |
@item 1.0 --- 5 January 1997 | |
@code{#f} was distinguished from @code{'()}. User-level, cooperative | |
multi-threading was added. Source-level debugging became more useful, | |
and programmer's and user's manuals were begun. The module system | |
gained a high-level interface, which is still used today in more or | |
less the same form. | |
@item 1.1 --- 16 May 1997 | |
@itemx 1.2 --- 24 June 1997 | |
Support for Tcl/Tk and ctax were split off as separate packages, and | |
have remained there since. Guile became more compatible with SCSH, and | |
more useful as a UNIX scripting language. Libguile could now be built as | |
a shared library, and third-party extensions written in C became | |
loadable via dynamic linking. | |
@item 1.3.0 --- 19 October 1998 | |
Command-line editing became much more pleasant through the use of the | |
readline library. The initial support for internationalization via | |
multi-byte strings was removed; 10 years were to pass before proper | |
internationalization would land again. Initial Emacs Lisp support | |
landed, ports gained better support for file descriptors, and fluids | |
were added. | |
@item 1.3.2 --- 20 August 1999 | |
@itemx 1.3.4 --- 25 September 1999 | |
@itemx 1.4 --- 21 June 2000 | |
A long list of lispy features were added: hooks, Common Lisp's | |
@code{format}, optional and keyword procedure arguments, | |
@code{getopt-long}, sorting, random numbers, and many other fixes and | |
enhancements. Guile also gained an interactive debugger, interactive | |
help, and better backtraces. | |
@item 1.6 --- 6 September 2002 | |
Guile gained support for the R5RS standard, and added a number of SRFI | |
modules. The module system was expanded with programmatic support for | |
identifier selection and renaming. The GOOPS object system was merged | |
into Guile core. | |
@item 1.8 --- 20 February 2006 | |
Guile's arbitrary-precision arithmetic switched to use the GMP | |
library, and added support for exact rationals. Guile's embedded | |
user-space threading was removed in favor of POSIX pre-emptive | |
threads, providing true multiprocessing. Gettext support was added, | |
and Guile's C API was cleaned up and orthogonalized in a massive way. | |
@item 2.0 --- 16 February 2010 | |
A virtual machine was added to Guile, along with the associated compiler | |
and toolchain. Support for internationalization was finally | |
reimplemented, in terms of unicode, locales, and libunistring. Running | |
Guile instances became controllable and debuggable from within Emacs, | |
via Geiser. Guile caught up to features found in a number of other | |
Schemes: SRFI-18 threads, module-hygienic macros, a profiler, tracer, | |
and debugger, SSAX XML integration, bytevectors, a dynamic FFI, | |
delimited continuations, module versions, and partial support for R6RS. | |
@item 2.2 --- 15 March 2017 | |
The virtual machine and introduced in 2.0 was completely rewritten, | |
along with much of the compiler and toolchain. This speeds up many | |
Guile programs as well as reducing startup time and memory usage. | |
Guile's POSIX multithreading was improved, stacks became dynamically | |
expandable, the ports facility gained support for non-blocking I/O. | |
@item 3.0 -- January 2020 | |
Guile gained support for native code generation via a simple | |
just-in-time (JIT) compiler, further improving the speed of its virtual | |
machine. The compiler itself gained a number of new optimizations: | |
inlining of top-level bindings, better closure optimization, and better | |
unboxing of integer and floating-point values. R7RS support was added, | |
and R6RS support improved. The exception facility (throw and catch) was | |
rewritten in terms of SRFI-34 exception handlers. | |
@end table | |
@node Status | |
@subsection Status, or: Your Help Needed | |
Guile has achieved much of what it set out to achieve, but there is | |
much remaining to do. | |
There is still the old problem of bringing existing applications into | |
a more Emacs-like experience. Guile has had some successes in this | |
respect, but still most applications in the GNU system are without | |
Guile integration. | |
Getting Guile to those applications takes an investment, the | |
``hacktivation energy'' needed to wire Guile into a program that only | |
pays off once it is good enough to enable new kinds of behavior. This | |
would be a great way for new hackers to contribute: take an | |
application that you use and that you know well, think of something | |
that it can't yet do, and figure out a way to integrate Guile and | |
implement that task in Guile. | |
With time, perhaps this exposure can reverse itself, whereby programs | |
can run under Guile instead of vice versa, eventually resulting in the | |
Emacsification of the entire GNU system. Indeed, this is the reason | |
for the naming of the many Guile modules that live in the @code{ice-9} | |
namespace, a nod to the fictional substance in Kurt Vonnegut's | |
novel, Cat's Cradle, capable of acting as a seed crystal to | |
crystallize the mass of software. | |
Implicit to this whole discussion is the idea that dynamic languages | |
are somehow better than languages like C. While languages like C have | |
their place, Guile's take on this question is that yes, Scheme is more | |
expressive than C, and more fun to write. This realization carries an | |
imperative with it to write as much code in Scheme as possible rather | |
than in other languages. | |
These days it is possible to write extensible applications almost | |
entirely from high-level languages, through byte-code and native | |
compilation, speed gains in the underlying hardware, and foreign call | |
interfaces in the high-level language. Smalltalk systems are like this, | |
as are Common Lisp-based systems. While there already are a number of | |
pure-Guile applications out there, in the past users have still needed | |
to drop down to C for some tasks: interfacing to system libraries that | |
don't have prebuilt Guile interfaces, and for some tasks requiring high | |
performance. With the arrival of native code generation via a JIT | |
compiler in Guile 3.0, most of these older applications can now be | |
updated to move more C code to Scheme. | |
Still, even with an all-Guile application, sometimes you want to | |
provide an opportunity for users to extend your program from a | |
language with a syntax that is closer to C, or to Python. Another | |
interesting idea to consider is compiling e.g.@: Python to Guile. It's | |
not that far-fetched of an idea: see for example IronPython or JRuby. | |
Also, there's Emacs itself. Guile's Emacs Lisp support has reached an | |
excellent level of correctness, robustness, and speed. However there is | |
still work to do to finish its integration into Emacs itself. This will | |
give lots of exciting things to Emacs: native threads, a real object | |
system, more sophisticated types, cleaner syntax, and access to all of | |
the Guile extensions. | |
Finally, so much of the world's computation is performed in web browsers | |
that it makes sense to ask ourselves what the Guile-on-the-web-client | |
story is. With the advent of WebAssembly, there may finally be a | |
reasonable compilation target that's present on almost all user-exposed | |
devices. Especially with the upcoming proposals to allow for tail | |
calls, delimited continuations, and GC-managed objects, Scheme might | |
once again have a place in the web browser. Get to it! | |