Re: emacs roadmap

[Noah Lavine <noah.b.lavine@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1871 bytes --]

Hello,

I know very little about Emacs development, but I'm a Guile developer, so
let me see if I can explain that situation: Guile used to be an embeddable
implementation of the Scheme programming language, and there was a plan to
use Guile in Emacs and rewrite everything in Guile. Guile (since 2.0) is
now an embeddable VM and a collection of compilers to that VM. It can run
Elisp in the same way that Emacs can. There has been talk of using the
Guile VM in Emacs.

As for realism - it's certainly a realistic possibility technically. The
work would mostly be in the C part of Emacs - changing lisp.h, the
interpreter, and similar things. The low-level Elisp that implements the
compiler would also change, but almost all Elisp would be untouched. There
would be some technical advantages, and I can think of one possible
technical downside. (I'll write more about those if anyone's interested.)

But I think the biggest question is sociological - do the Emacs developers
*want* to use Guile? Is the benefit of work-sharing worth the loss of some
amount of control over their language implementation? I can't answer that.

I hope this is helpful,
Noah Lavine


On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Tony Day <tonyday567@gmail.com> wrote:

> Is there a long term roadmap for emacs research and development that
> someone could point to?  Having done my homework I find nothing out
> there except rumour and myth.  For instance:
>
> - Is multi-threading coming to emacs 25?
> - Is there realistic support for replacing elisp with guile?  Is that
>   considered possible even?
> - If elisp is the future, what type of changes are envisaged?
>   - double escape regex fix?
>   - lexical closures (to support no namespaces)?
>   - first-class print for functions?
>
> More generally, when can we get turtles all the way down and enjoy the
> return of the symbolic machine?
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2332 bytes --]