From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: guile and emacs and elisp, oh my! Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 19:11:45 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1271988038.5907.7.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> <1272062597.6107.29.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1272216080 28963 80.91.229.12 (25 Apr 2010 17:21:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 17:21:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: tromey@redhat.com, Thomas Lord , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Apr 25 19:21:18 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 1O65US-0007kT-8P for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 19:21:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35572 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O65Rr-00008I-T3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 13:16:51 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1O65Rm-00007n-RA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 13:16:46 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=57556 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O65RY-0008UG-F8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 13:16:46 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O65Qf-0007TU-Mf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 13:15:39 -0400 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:58810 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O65Qf-0007Dv-JF; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 13:15:37 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49F1EAD7F9; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 13:13:28 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=eDr1gF5YU708E/vwXAKmthXjzXs=; b=gBRuoJ PhnxitJjvvZynBWPHqpyalGEf69M7R5F6owaB51oBONscUPKGpvmtfFGdKqppZch k950JunlIfWHaJqhleO4l+wxbhV0qL/8ySGTKxhhIav+F7ebTsbfxAB4YZPVX/MM xHn0ZZjN9wfFLqMNHx038kwrLymW1bQNizfrw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=uNJwNECFy5q4qRuFVzv3cYG2LRq63h8i CKwFvI9j03Sw00QgFEreHHDVFA2j/vFlMG4hbfBT+YxKsF4lnXJr4E5ppRFxA0sE pDopZjTuuj/tcYcXYfmDv/ZaDz+gZ1VXQ9SGAsB0uyhuHje+tOtTZIJgeaoWleVJ Z5N8GJlMfps= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix. (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1650DAD7F8; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 13:13:25 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from unquote (unknown [83.36.163.24]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 73693AD7F4; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 13:13:19 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Sun, 25 Apr 2010 12:54:39 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.92 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: DBADE8B0-508D-11DF-91FF-D033EE7EF46B-02397024!a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) 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:124199 Archived-At: Hi, On Sun 25 Apr 2010 18:54, Richard Stallman writes: > 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. That is something like what Guile does, except the mode can be determined statically -- it's the language that the code is written in. If it's elisp, they are equal, if it's scheme, they're not. > 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. Hashing nil, null, and false to the same value is probably a good idea. Then if you use an elisp accessor, you get elisp semantics, or scheme semantics with a scheme accessor. Andy -- http://wingolog.org/