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: What is emacs architecture ? Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2010 12:44:58 +0300 Message-ID: <83mxu271et.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20100707.150746.549331509773933118.yamato@redhat.com> <87hbkakf6d.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <83pqyy79uo.fsf@gnu.org> <87bpaijscj.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1278582501 21778 80.91.229.12 (8 Jul 2010 09:48:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 09:48:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: frenzeee@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 08 11:48:18 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OWniJ-0006gP-1t for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 08 Jul 2010 11:48:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38999 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OWniI-00070C-Lw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 08 Jul 2010 05:48:14 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=54304 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OWni7-000707-Us for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Jul 2010 05:48:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OWni4-0005HL-2C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Jul 2010 05:48:03 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:58930) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OWni3-0005HC-PM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Jul 2010 05:48:00 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0L5800K00GHKZG00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Jul 2010 12:46:58 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.127.120.144]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0L5800H54GI92UA0@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Thu, 08 Jul 2010 12:46:58 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <87bpaijscj.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:126903 Archived-At: > From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" > Cc: frenzeee@gmail.com, > emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2010 17:22:20 +0900 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > > http://www.xemacs.org/Documentation/21.5/html/internals.html > > > > > > It's not intensively maintained, and obviously is going to differ from > > > GNU Emacs in many details. > > > > In too many details, I'm afraid. > > *At the level* we're talking about (UML diagrams!), it doesn't really > matter if *redisplay* is *implemented* differently. The problems > encountered are the same, and it fits into the LISP read-eval-print > loop in basically the same way. (Ie, it's not actually a R-E-P loop, > it's based on a GUI event loop with the R being "receive event" and P > being "redisplay", and the E has to take account of being event- > driven.) I could be wrong, but it's my understanding that it is that > kind of thing that the OP wants to get a handle on. I'm not sure. The general ideas are the same, that's true, but they typically occupy only the first few sentences. Once you get past that, you get differences in names of structures, functions, and even file names, let alone basic mechanisms that implement the same general ideas. So if one wants to look up the details in the code, one cannot, and the detailed descriptions of the algorithms don't match what Emacs does in many cases. > Nor would it hurt the OP to see concepts that Emacs has rejected > (extents and specifiers, for example), not to mention some of the > things Emacs is currently in the process of thinking about adding > (loadable modules) and even some of the things we've kinda horked and > hopefully y'all will do better ("native" widgets). I agree, but that should hardly be recommended as the first reading. IMO, anyway.