From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Noah Lavine Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: emacs roadmap Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2012 17:37:31 -0500 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b2e118f0a6eec04d0ffe988 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1355697460 13287 80.91.229.3 (16 Dec 2012 22:37:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2012 22:37:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs devel To: Tony Day Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 16 23:37:55 2012 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 1TkMqE-0003YP-Ft for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 16 Dec 2012 23:37:50 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47461 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TkMq1-0005RA-8w for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 16 Dec 2012 17:37:37 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:48001) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TkMpz-0005Qp-1Y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Dec 2012 17:37:36 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TkMpx-0004tp-FZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Dec 2012 17:37:34 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-pa0-f41.google.com ([209.85.220.41]:45949) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TkMpx-0004tf-5f for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Dec 2012 17:37:33 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-pa0-f41.google.com with SMTP id bj3so3228792pad.0 for ; Sun, 16 Dec 2012 14:37:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=6wR4xiUORaKo1B9Rfx2wvwzWNmwoY/8SJRMyNPsh4kE=; b=iTWA0w91GUJ4KdToz0seuCtdFyjdaQoUM5c2pRBGacaV4PqxHVefmfDBT51ThWNG7G PKZRFBA0IwSZgzOEY1lTivXGEu8vrT/2wCCPhp1bKbPRtbe7gSoX/oqOrv/TmKh77TBn hPa3Gl3Zm8aHLT565VlUQLc0KOi0s7dep4L9hhcBw7Z4ZWIZCHpykrYWOu1pItlIAb/1 toYoAV+IgOFgWqlDHcHjqU1P4Lxasqos2DWr2S/uVKg6nx3mO1AZ0AJ5TEgMA4DLpGm4 pCcYBP+YER6nNMCDtpSW7Q0+PWAQtpJW8xXTaz3iI2AFOIHgoz6aNwYAcJoofa9877OZ S+ew== Original-Received: by 10.68.241.231 with SMTP id wl7mr37275269pbc.164.1355697451855; Sun, 16 Dec 2012 14:37:31 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.68.81.194 with HTTP; Sun, 16 Dec 2012 14:37:31 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: X-Google-Sender-Auth: -JKNcGBCemB6xq3tWB1bVH2Jx3s X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 209.85.220.41 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:155608 Archived-At: --047d7b2e118f0a6eec04d0ffe988 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 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 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? > > --047d7b2e118f0a6eec04d0ffe988 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello,

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

As for realism - it's certainly a realistic possibi= lity technically. The work would mostly be in the C part of Emacs - changin= g lisp.h, the interpreter, and similar things. The low-level Elisp that imp= lements the compiler would also change, but almost all Elisp would be untou= ched. There would be some technical advantages, and I can think of one poss= ible technical downside. (I'll write more about those if anyone's i= nterested.)

But I think the biggest question is sociological - do t= he Emacs developers *want* to use Guile? Is the benefit of work-sharing wor= th 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> wro= te:
Is there a long term roadmap for emacs resea= rch and development that
someone could point to? =A0Having done my homework I find nothing out
there except rumour and myth. =A0For instance:

- Is multi-threading coming to emacs 25?
- Is there realistic support for replacing elisp with guile? =A0Is that
=A0 considered possible even?
- If elisp is the future, what type of changes are envisaged?
=A0 - double escape regex fix?
=A0 - lexical closures (to support no namespaces)?
=A0 - first-class print for functions?

More generally, when can we get turtles all the way down and enjoy the
return of the symbolic machine?


--047d7b2e118f0a6eec04d0ffe988--