From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: John Wiegley Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs rewrite in a maintainable language Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 09:49:53 -0700 Organization: New Artisans LLC Message-ID: References: <561A19AB.5060001@cumego.com> <87io6dl0h0.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87lhb82qxc.fsf@gmail.com> <87oag4jk74.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87k2qrki45.fsf@wanadoo.es> <83mvvnooo4.fsf@gnu.org> <83lhb7oo4e.fsf@gnu.org> <83k2qqzuir.fsf@gnu.org> <314ef82d-c3d4-49fb-a81d-0b58984c8c37@default> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1444755089 19583 80.91.229.3 (13 Oct 2015 16:51:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 16:51:29 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 13 18:51:28 2015 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 1Zm2nP-0001oT-5k for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:51:27 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38143 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm2nN-0004nQ-TP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:51:25 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48724) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm2m1-0004dZ-5h for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:50:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm2lx-0001o6-3z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:50:01 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pa0-x22a.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22a]:34430) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm2lw-0001nz-Uk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:49:57 -0400 Original-Received: by padhy16 with SMTP id hy16so26232906pad.1 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 09:49:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:date:organization:message-id :references:user-agent:mail-followup-to:mime-version:content-type; bh=NoCF0IHEqG6I9FkVPfdnrUPvd0SlWzmZbV7GEFU3jrg=; b=lFAbJE7BEOh5PNsPwElya2ra8RVYjlgc6GkIl4cNAfU+AOdRnRkzH8cPU9mlg9nfjC QE/T5wbBEMPQ5sJhiA5VskXeWF3Lfb8itWCKUzovnnlWc2DB2d0MSK84r0nDgr6v3aQm oOYFtcUpp8oesJBRWF+eRN0lPmE02HkFjr7xlFP2eV0vTgv5M/x8sCuPEe4lHdmlJTeO MNL0FRv7XYiLyECXQ4S8Pz9FTCjpSELDmWrhIxc78o+6GgMEqpfFAsKb1Ees+D3+sxRU I8mLmkLeMznjkijVBj5iLTo2w3PyQlrSD9aCAEy6kWBxxW6w94p4yM3P5ESGJA3ffbQb G2ZQ== X-Received: by 10.68.240.73 with SMTP id vy9mr42315575pbc.24.1444754996338; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 09:49:56 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from Vulcan.local (76-234-68-79.lightspeed.frokca.sbcglobal.net. [76.234.68.79]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id nv2sm4825936pbc.48.2015.10.13.09.49.55 for (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 13 Oct 2015 09:49:55 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by Vulcan.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 0C852F2DB307; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 09:49:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <314ef82d-c3d4-49fb-a81d-0b58984c8c37@default> (Drew Adams's message of "Tue, 13 Oct 2015 09:40:15 -0700 (PDT)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (darwin) Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22a 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:191499 Archived-At: >>>>> Drew Adams writes: >> The C we have works for us, so this idea is pretty low priority. As you >> wrote in another thread, there are several, higher priority items that >> would win us more contributors faster (documentation, etc). Even changing >> from C to a Lisp would not be a silver bullet: the display code would still >> be a hard problem to solve. > And yet the thread goes on. Lower priority, little light. I'm OK with this discussion, since we have developers who are curious about the feasibility and benefits such a change might bring. Yes, it's low priority, but that doesn't make it uninteresting. :) John