From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: guile and emacs and elisp, oh my! Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 12:54:39 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1271988038.5907.7.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> <1272062597.6107.29.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1272214489 23461 80.91.229.12 (25 Apr 2010 16:54:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 16:54:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: wingo@pobox.com, tromey@redhat.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Thomas Lord Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Apr 25 18:54:47 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O656U-0003lG-RN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 18:54:47 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52172 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O656U-0001Q5-9N for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 12:54:46 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1O656Q-0001Pz-5e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 12:54:42 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=37650 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O656O-0001Pr-RL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 12:54:40 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1O656N-00015O-N0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 12:54:40 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:42906) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1O656N-00015K-GN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 12:54:39 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O656N-0005lr-7b; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 12:54:39 -0400 In-reply-to: <1272062597.6107.29.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> (message from Thomas Lord on Fri, 23 Apr 2010 15:43:17 -0700) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:124198 Archived-At: Sure, Schemers ought to be encouraged to write "(null? x)" rather than "(eq? x '())" but ... what about "(eq? x y)"? My original plan was to have two execution modes, a Lisp mode in which () and Scheme's false object are equal, and a Scheme mode in which they were not equal. I had a plan for nil too, but I don't remember what it was. And: since Emacs lisp and Guile can't agree about equality (whichever flavor) - how do I write a hash table library useful to both environments? It should hash all the kinds of nil the same. Then, as regards the comparison, it can depend on the execution mode as inherited from the caller.