From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Taylan Ulrich Bayirli/Kammer Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs Lisp's future Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 13:29:31 +0200 Message-ID: <87bnqdupyc.fsf@taylan.uni.cx> References: <87wq97i78i.fsf@earlgrey.lan> <87sijqxzr2.fsf@newcastle.ac.uk> <878uliwajb.fsf@taylan.uni.cx> <87lhpitg6t.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87wq92uhwh.fsf@taylan.uni.cx> <87wq91si9s.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87oauduue2.fsf@taylan.uni.cx> <87a95xs0j8.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1411039803 10271 80.91.229.3 (18 Sep 2014 11:30:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 11:30:03 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Sep 18 13:29:56 2014 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 1XUZuN-0001BM-HU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 13:29:55 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49996 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XUZuN-00086i-52 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 07:29:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46733) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XUZu8-00086d-Fv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 07:29:41 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XUZu7-00016n-9Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 07:29:40 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-la0-x22a.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c03::22a]:59057) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XUZu7-00016Y-24; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 07:29:39 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-la0-f42.google.com with SMTP id hz20so935525lab.1 for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 04:29:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=2vlMmpTlDT3SVy2sQ144jRzYFI/MrGvCtv6PLsGUtjI=; b=dBgoTQzEhDvIWHmIJFAb+U1gtw03uVHeWEslJolddHQXcSvvcWGQ6rwG9tZsEPZYM3 LunW769DPUkfYzidLgzsJLItJRGx/aRqjsY9/j/xqH+aWFTovbKfnPULmE2u5ZR3LOY/ YHDNCxHXoVNcErfWKauOCMAR04ZFXQdbpPx8JLMFWMyGYnXOJM2Wg5QBoyoiV3Gdw24X NSHF0rmrwQ5/NHbvzYbGAE6XkiWhQwseIuSmTpNma1RQ8VCTuVxkuM3f/G+fZm/4jbBo yJ2yPACLz9UivGv+sDzfn8BEgSURww2FfRmu7eRwsAsnwQf3wnrMzPecK87CsbUwm40/ KzdQ== X-Received: by 10.112.135.199 with SMTP id pu7mr2583335lbb.99.1411039772949; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 04:29:32 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from taylan.uni.cx (p200300514A48ABEE0213E8FFFEED36FB.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [2003:51:4a48:abee:213:e8ff:feed:36fb]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id i3sm6816421laa.8.2014.09.18.04.29.32 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 18 Sep 2014 04:29:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87a95xs0j8.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> (David Kastrup's message of "Thu, 18 Sep 2014 12:09:15 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4010:c03::22a 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:174494 Archived-At: David Kastrup writes: > I think you are misunderstanding the problem. The problem is not that > technical problems occured after large changes. The problem is that > GUILE developers cannot be bothered with the fallout in affected > projects. I don't mean to insult but I have the impression that, what the Guile developers could not be bothered with might have been the LilyPond maintainer rather than LilyPond itself. > GUILE development will cater better for Elisp than for Scheme? That > does sound peculiar. Is this pitch being made anywhere else apart from > the Emacs developer list? Guile has authority over Guile-Scheme, but not over Elisp; it has to and will support Elisp as defined by Emacs as much as possible. That's pretty obvious I'd say. If the Emacs/Guile merge became fully complete in several years and all remnants of non-Guile Emacs disappeared, then it could be vaguely imaginable that Guile took control over Elisp semantics, but that "ain't gonna happen" under such Emacs community pressure. :-) You can bet on Guile taking Elisp only to where Elispers want it to go. Taylan