From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: "Bringing GNU Emacs to Native Code" at the European Lisp Symposium Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 15:00:37 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <69d8b48d-bd09-41c1-a89d-ed76fe0284a4@default> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="125282"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Andrea Corallo To: Stefan Kangas , Emacs developers Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 29 00:02:05 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 1jTYIn-000WUQ-Lh for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 00:02:05 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52478 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jTYIm-0002ce-M4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 18:02:04 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52312) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jTYHZ-0001Oy-Hp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 18:00:51 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jTYHX-0004D8-Ns for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 18:00:49 -0400 Original-Received: from aserp2120.oracle.com ([141.146.126.78]:44564) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jTYHX-00049a-4w for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 18:00:47 -0400 Original-Received: from pps.filterd (aserp2120.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp2120.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 03SLwv2C163575; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 22:00:43 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=mime-version : message-id : date : from : sender : to : cc : subject : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=corp-2020-01-29; bh=C2BtUT4PK6MCiOkP1ayWjWeWbFq3A2XFv5mWnSKxUm0=; b=ppMitG2rGhI83gYmL1ggWl5Pn9AKW4m53X/tRV5Lxkc2jEuQdcxTnKouoeJCetefQ+J7 W4Ir7RYS8op05cG85QBVluXHUkmNfYBNSc3rw2HfPetEYTHDifz1Em+cQlqtaGKe3QQt evuU4yvBMXJgZ/NLU92JveN2CTn6sKuFktg87JlW3XGeOcQ2LkIJCWzxmsQ/h4CMWwhm V0zvb/edTRiEUntQro4p6pQ7GFtM6Jwp8XrAZsKusH4EcSN+VBc0/2q/snZ+P8s25luD yVA116TJZ9BlJj6smPZd3Uq+pJBWX4iPQLBpCvzn+ZUo2iy64RDoqi9KTqk1XDxbuWzj 9g== Original-Received: from aserp3020.oracle.com (aserp3020.oracle.com [141.146.126.70]) by aserp2120.oracle.com with ESMTP id 30nucg2kaf-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 28 Apr 2020 22:00:43 +0000 Original-Received: from pps.filterd (aserp3020.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp3020.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 03SLv0Du041201; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 22:00:42 GMT Original-Received: from aserv0121.oracle.com (aserv0121.oracle.com [141.146.126.235]) by aserp3020.oracle.com with ESMTP id 30my0ehhf3-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 28 Apr 2020 22:00:42 +0000 Original-Received: from abhmp0013.oracle.com (abhmp0013.oracle.com [141.146.116.19]) by aserv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 03SM0cTn005477; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 22:00:38 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9.1 (1003210) [OL 16.0.4993.0 (x86)] X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9605 signatures=668686 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 malwarescore=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 bulkscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2003020000 definitions=main-2004280168 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9605 signatures=668686 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 clxscore=1015 priorityscore=1501 mlxlogscore=999 impostorscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2003020000 definitions=main-2004280168 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=141.146.126.78; envelope-from=drew.adams@oracle.com; helo=aserp2120.oracle.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/04/28 18:00:44 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 141.146.126.78 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:248050 Archived-At: 1. It's a good paper, and the work sounds great. 2. FWIW, I don't agree with this prognostication or point of view, from the paper, starting after "since": "The proposed compiler focuses on generating code for the new lexically scoped dialect only, since the dynamic one is considered obsolete and close to deprecation." Dunno who, besides perhaps Stefan, considers dynamic binding in Elisp to be "obsolete and close to deprecation". That would be a mistake. IMO, Emacs Lisp should, like Common Lisp and for even stronger reasons, continue to make use of both dynamic and lexical binding. Each has its uses in Elisp. The "even stronger" comes from the particular use, for users in particular, described by RMS in his 1981 defense of it: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/emacs-paper.html#SEC17 https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/emacs-paper.html#SEC18