From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs rewrite in a maintainable language Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:12:24 +0300 Message-ID: <83d1wiztt3.fsf@gnu.org> References: <561A19AB.5060001@cumego.com> <87io6dl0h0.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87lhb82qxc.fsf@gmail.com> <87oag4jk74.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87k2qrki45.fsf@wanadoo.es> <8737xf9je9.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1444749196 1682 80.91.229.3 (13 Oct 2015 15:13:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:13:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 13 17:13:07 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm1GD-00054z-GG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 17:13:05 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36757 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm1GC-0000p9-Kl for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:13:04 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40802) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm1FW-0000kC-7u for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:12:27 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm1FQ-0008Ih-J9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:12:22 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout27.012.net.il ([80.179.55.183]:49440) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm1FM-0008Gb-O5; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:12:12 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout27.012.net.il by mtaout27.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NW500C00Z3UPF00@mtaout27.012.net.il>; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:08:10 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.94.185.246]) by mtaout27.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NW500AJTZDM8S30@mtaout27.012.net.il>; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:08:10 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <8737xf9je9.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 80.179.55.183 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:191471 Archived-At: > From: David Kastrup > Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:01:50 +0200 > > > If it can leverage what the contributor already knows about Elisp, I'm > > all for it. I wonder what RMS' and Eli's reaction would be. > > There is the GUILE branch. First, Guile's Scheme is not Emacs Lisp, there are significant differences. Second, Guile itself is written in C, so what exactly is gained here? Third, AFAIR the Guile branch doesn't replace all of Emacs's C core. Fourth, that branch is far from ready for prime time (as you know and point out). > GUILE's byte compiler is supposed to do a better job than Elisp. But for now it has known problems with ELisp (some tests fail). Also, at least Guile's own byte code (the *.go files) are not architecture-independent, so building a Guile Emacs will need a long compilation on the target machine. Not a catastrophe, but hardly a nice thing.