Emacs language
in [Lisp]
|
Prev: Jewish Pirates of the Caribbean
Next: THE JEWISH GENOCIDE OF ARMENIAN CHRISTIANS - The Jews SCREWED Everyone - Spared NO ONE !!!
From: Nicolas Neuss on 16 Jun 2010 08:24 Teemu Likonen <tlikonen(a)iki.fi> writes: > 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. :-) Agreed. Unfortunately, RMS has kept some trauma from his first exposure to Common Lisp. And the Hyperspec is not under the GDL... > 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 Thanks for the links. I looked at the first one and saw that luckily there are already a few CLers keeping up our flag there. Nicolas
From: Leo on 16 Jun 2010 08:37 On 2010-06-15 21:13 +0100, Teemu Likonen wrote: > 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. :-) I just read the links you posted. There are some people from guile camp strongly arguing for guile while none of important figures in the common lisp camp does that. There were at one episode discussing re-using the HyperSpec. I wouldn't entirely rule out the possibility of common lisp. Leo
From: Teemu Likonen on 17 Jun 2010 04:00
* 2010-06-16 13:37 (+0100), Leo wrote: > I just read the links you posted. > > There are some people from guile camp strongly arguing for guile while > none of important figures in the common lisp camp does that. There > were at one episode discussing re-using the HyperSpec. I wouldn't > entirely rule out the possibility of common lisp. Perhaps not completely but the political camp tends to win in FSF and core GNU circles. In my opinion they sometimes they make stupid choices because of politics. My bet is that the real options for Emacs language are (1) continue to use (and possibly improve a bit) the current Emacs Lisp or (2) switch to Guile. |