unofficial mirror of emacs-devel@gnu.org 
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman@gmail.com>
To: "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com>
Cc: Emacs-Devel devel <emacs-devel@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Why bring new features to Emacs and not Emacs to new applications?
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2013 22:20:28 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANbX365zc04UzHGNcoLTdHw71E95Vw77V_2AL0RSLfiohqwLtg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8761rhv7kc.fsf@informatimago.com>

On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 10:00 PM, Pascal J. Bourguignon
<pjb@informatimago.com> wrote:
>
> For example, if an application is written in C++ (often the case
> nowadays), and use templates (also often the case if they use C++), then
> you already have a major stumbling block, in interfacing Lisp with C++
> thru a FFI:  Lisp has a dynamic nature where the objects are created at
> run-time, while C++ templates are instanciated at compilation time.  If

I do not unserstand much on this level, but is not OLE etc designed to
address these difficulties. (But see below.)

> - lisp hostile data structures,
>
>   Lisp use a garbage collector and typed objects, while other
>   programming languages often use instead manual memory management and
>   typed variables.  Keeping both structures consistent in parallel would
>   be a lot work.

I guess that is a work that must be done if plugin (or similar
interfaces) should be created. But the main problem is perhaps doing
that efficiently. And in the background, of course.

> - incompatible control structure.
>
>   While most applications will have like emacs a main event loop, it is
>   not designed usually to go thru (dynamically modifiable) keymaps to
>   handle in a uniform way the events, but would rather rely on
>   frameworks, which may implement their own modal control loops.

Isn't this an area where Emacs must change?



  reply	other threads:[~2013-11-24 21:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-11-24 18:38 Why bring new features to Emacs and not Emacs to new applications? (was: Emacs as word processor) Torsten Wagner
2013-11-24 21:00 ` Why bring new features to Emacs and not Emacs to new applications? Pascal J. Bourguignon
2013-11-24 21:20   ` Lennart Borgman [this message]
2013-11-24 23:37     ` Pascal J. Bourguignon
2013-11-25  1:20       ` Lennart Borgman
2013-11-25 20:12         ` Pascal J. Bourguignon
2013-11-25 21:14           ` Lennart Borgman

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CANbX365zc04UzHGNcoLTdHw71E95Vw77V_2AL0RSLfiohqwLtg@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=lennart.borgman@gmail.com \
    --cc=emacs-devel@gnu.org \
    --cc=pjb@informatimago.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).