From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Standardizing more key bindings? Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 09:08:20 +0100 Message-ID: <20201102080820.GA29521@tuxteam.de> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="UugvWAfsgieZRqgk" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="35746"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 02 09:09:08 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kZUto-00099A-Q3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 02 Nov 2020 09:09:08 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40026 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kZUtn-0005BW-Pl for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 02 Nov 2020 03:09:07 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53460) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kZUtB-0004k4-WE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Nov 2020 03:08:30 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.tuxteam.de ([5.199.139.25]:43925) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kZUt9-0002t8-Fm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Nov 2020 03:08:29 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tuxteam.de; s=mail; h=From:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:To:Date; bh=puZygu1WW6XxE342TemwZwavPELHkbFWKCOgsFFgZDQ=; b=bFDFGkh7LAXzCzA1ighP0JGBdzCsk6v03Fjq19lrrWHQiC+unTulYWGMbhKH+2pu9F6t6o3TNc0k052i84EAgOmfYsB0C+LuUYZA+nIyWG06Wc4aTdr2ockF2NPWB7Po9LKc1kM1dhVGYwrHVq5LEBYzqZqSm1XZIc79Jd2aK7Ko/ETr9lztor8srlHRM5PGG0CREh4+n9uJWvoyIxESqkrSskcyKmpOB/zkWHcocwFRYlrReGHF6Dn+kg/mYSt8ntB0aVSCVojUGVnBrmip7xm5V9G1H4OtXiduaQ+uvAR4rsQQD1eIrtz/wyrydVaSoL2Op/sZFGUJMVD0I/ITSw==; Original-Received: from tomas by mail.tuxteam.de with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1kZUt7-0007lW-3g for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Nov 2020 09:08:25 +0100 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=5.199.139.25; envelope-from=tomas@tuxteam.de; helo=mail.tuxteam.de X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/11/02 03:08:25 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.1-3.10 [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:258622 Archived-At: --UugvWAfsgieZRqgk Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 01:14:49PM +0700, Yuri Khan wrote: > On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 at 12:41, Richard Stallman wrote: >=20 > > > So what? Their command loop does do "read, then eval, then print". > > > > No, it doesn't. It parses and executes a command, but it is > > misleading to describe that as "read, then eval" in those languages. > > > > > Whether the "read", the "eval", and the "print" part are made avail= able > > > to the language or only used by the interactive loop > > > > Those conceptual parts are implemented separately in Lisp because Lisp > > exposes them. In a language which does not expose them to users, they > > may not exist as separate parts in the code. >=20 > Python has ast.parse(), compile() and exec(), all three exposed in the > standard library. Can we please continue to use the REPL term for > Python, even though there is an additional intermediate step between > reading and evaluation. The difference is that in Python, this is an after-thought. In the Lisps, it's a design principle. One can feel that :-) Cheers - t --UugvWAfsgieZRqgk Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAl+fvnQACgkQBcgs9XrR2kZlrwCfZfgDEX19j7LhxmjGca7RJjmc QDQAnj2G5QasHzfgQ1Xf++3/Dl5lumL4 =UvZl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --UugvWAfsgieZRqgk--