From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lynn Winebarger Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Shrinking the C core Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2023 07:31:35 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87ledwx7sh.fsf@yahoo.com> <877cpfybhf.fsf@yahoo.com> <873503y66i.fsf@yahoo.com> <87fs3ur9u8.fsf@dataswamp.org> <875y4moiiq.fsf@dataswamp.org> <83r0n4rj78.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ce0073060527c982" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="30887"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Richard Stallman , incal@dataswamp.org, emacs-devel To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Sep 12 15:47:05 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qg3jM-0007lI-Oh for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 12 Sep 2023 15:47:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qg1cq-0005lX-9A; Tue, 12 Sep 2023 07:32:12 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qg1cb-0005ep-2Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Sep 2023 07:32:00 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pj1-x1029.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::1029]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qg1cW-000110-10; Tue, 12 Sep 2023 07:31:55 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-pj1-x1029.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-26fc5a218daso3857116a91.1; Tue, 12 Sep 2023 04:31:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1694518308; x=1695123108; darn=gnu.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=77qY6hkR/PWFDmD88BIUXFe1SYVryq2AX7LURiUHmPg=; b=oSmmWSYJxgxnZaKzwLu+nnmTwzdB2/aNuAZG7PbPXyVKh/SCc9lRtd7ys0WT2Kdpk2 y8fQazfD+4JtM62ZVcB77W89OuQuDZfQX7KRT21iVaW8xg1nMfz508CzJewynQOXoyRV BZkPeqzUyt2Qc6MIb+XnXdhTAyZ/VJV1vIcS0Yfy1CvNxyGfZxXhd68ErV2qLRMmj3xR 31RlDnGbhAwn7F8WYfr3Kttp5HxDN14Pc9u2Ap0NKz2ydipbnZql5IcqWzzhpuqrz4kc 6Lh6qCDzPwuyLS7OnxS07kNIPTc3WrmAmSSUbtie/ZNIpIGHsFBvp7O4uOGeu64m0g0j CjcA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1694518308; x=1695123108; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=77qY6hkR/PWFDmD88BIUXFe1SYVryq2AX7LURiUHmPg=; b=ZhY6nrzPbOTN0yePeNL1a1jdXnSRUGgoWEomiMwUfUecsUOa0tSpxKZcYyieq6mzWk 72J3cxW3SGj084jZRoug/iG3cwXd6vri+yPRqUJOJao8PtiYePjPxU1+l4n3jj/EH1/e Z1uoysJNIUCLxJDRkiabjLlFWZnAvBKWeI0Ne3wB//GVQRw86uhxptw+WpfOvzqi+zDr k38poizkOIf0L0RY6QY8oH0+tZxYZ1q6TN40Qzkem83yZLzQf14BbT35ZsjZ4BaTwvon kc6vUu+NPzQyZATWpgj0EeXbpK2ppAB0COgoj9z8VVq7sBPD5LmU2L79gJWjEbgi9875 5Q5w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzcP9ZUlRPXnWar1HnMKxgz/xlm7e0FIN9CnA0SGDrbjyrhMynD vfQyDIPuFg06YqRBGrHlvkIc1ZyvZGXUjM0aw/8wEtRN X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHxzcQA05456Gs4xDnHDTFVXAmmjTdFj3RTAXf0Vwp+CxYfimWvioyvzw+nQrN9mui6X3nDvm3s+DXq6Tm7gos= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:4315:b0:26d:af2:d491 with SMTP id q21-20020a17090a431500b0026d0af2d491mr9600520pjg.34.1694518307846; Tue, 12 Sep 2023 04:31:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83r0n4rj78.fsf@gnu.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::1029; envelope-from=owinebar@gmail.com; helo=mail-pj1-x1029.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:310518 Archived-At: --000000000000ce0073060527c982 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, Sep 11, 2023, 8:26 AM Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > From: Richard Stallman > > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > > Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2023 20:43:01 -0400 > > > > > You are right, absolutely, but then I cannot see why people > > > can't push for a SBCL rewrite of Emacs? > > > > Because that is not up for decision. That decision is already made. > > > > If the question were up for decision, arguing for a certain choice > > would be normal participation. When it isn't, arguing for a choice is > > making life difficult. I have too much work to do, and I can't keep > > up. So does Eli. Eli can speak for himself, but if you make it > necessary > > for me to spend more time on this, that is making difficulties. > > IMNSHO, discussing a rewrite of Emacs in _any_ language is waste of > time and energy. We've seen this many times (because people still > insist on bringing this up from time to time). From where I stand, > the main reason is not even the fact that we decided not to do that, > but the fact that such a rewrite will never happen in practice. Such > a rewrite is a massive job which requires very good knowledge of Emacs > internals and features, and a lot of time. People who come close to > the required knowledge level are not interested in doing this job > (because they understand the futility), and those who think it should > be done simply don't know enough and/or don't have enough time on > their hands to pull it through. > > If Emacs will ever be "rewritten", it will not be Emacs, but a > text-processing system with a very different architecture and design, > which will take from the Emacs experience the lessons we learned and > implement them differently, to produce a system whose starting point > is closer to the needs of today's users and whose main technologies > are more modern from the get-go. > It sounds like you have some specific ideas. I wouldn't mind hearing them at more length. My understanding is the design is deliberately kept simple (or "simple") to make it accessible to more programmers. Instead of discussing porting emacs to CL, why don't people work on porting the compiler techniques used in CL to emacs? Lynn --000000000000ce0073060527c982 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Mon, Sep 11, 2023, 8:26 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2023 20:43:01 -0400
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0> You are right, absolutely, but then I cannot see why = people
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0> can't push for a SBCL rewrite of Emacs?
>
> Because that is not up for decision.=C2=A0 That decision is already ma= de.
>
> If the question were up for decision, arguing for a certain choice
> would be normal participation.=C2=A0 When it isn't, arguing for a = choice is
> making life difficult.=C2=A0 I have too much work to do, and I can'= ;t keep
> up.=C2=A0 So does Eli.=C2=A0 Eli can speak for himself, but if you mak= e it necessary
> for me to spend more time on this, that is making difficulties.

IMNSHO, discussing a rewrite of Emacs in _any_ language is waste of
time and energy.=C2=A0 We've seen this many times (because people still=
insist on bringing this up from time to time).=C2=A0 From where I stand, the main reason is not even the fact that we decided not to do that,
but the fact that such a rewrite will never happen in practice.=C2=A0 Such<= br> a rewrite is a massive job which requires very good knowledge of Emacs
internals and features, and a lot of time.=C2=A0 People who come close to the required knowledge level are not interested in doing this job
(because they understand the futility), and those who think it should
be done simply don't know enough and/or don't have enough time on their hands to pull it through.

If Emacs will ever be "rewritten", it will not be Emacs, but a text-processing system with a very different architecture and design,
which will take from the Emacs experience the lessons we learned and
implement them differently, to produce a system whose starting point
is closer to the needs of today's users and whose main technologies
are more modern from the get-go.

It sounds like you have some specific ideas= .=C2=A0 I wouldn't mind hearing them at more length.

My understanding is the design is delibera= tely kept simple (or "simple") to make it accessible to more prog= rammers.=C2=A0=C2=A0

Ins= tead of discussing porting emacs to CL,=C2=A0 why don't people work on = porting the compiler techniques used in CL to emacs?=C2=A0=C2=A0

Lynn



--000000000000ce0073060527c982--