Prev: Re-use constructor from superclass
Next: A Question I will never ask (was ''Is Scheme/LISP faster thanC/C+'')
From: Teemu Likonen on 15 Jun 2010 16:13
* 2010-06-15 20:37 (+0100), Leo wrote:

> I think what would be interesting is to clean up the mess in elisp. We
> have cl and eieio that provide half-assed compatibility for common
> lisp. Why not use the real thing instead by rebasing emacs onto common
> lisp and gradually phase out elisp? That would bring in some good new
> users to the community.

I think Common Lisp would be a great choice but I don't think there is
much hope for it. It seems that Emacs developers want to use Guile
(GNU's own Scheme implementation) instead. Guile aims to support Emacs
Lisp but I believe that in practice it would be a quite much more
backwards-incompatible change than line-move-visual=t. :-)

Here are links to some Guile-related discussions in emacs-devel mailing
list earlier this year:

"Guile in Emacs"
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/121291/focus=121734

"guile and emacs and elisp, oh my!"
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/123666

"Logistics of Using Guile"
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/124089

But if you seriously want to have a part in this game you need to
subscribe to emacs-devel and express yourself there:

http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Re-use constructor from superclass
Next: A Question I will never ask (was ''Is Scheme/LISP faster thanC/C+'')