From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Samuel Wales Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.tangents Subject: Re: emacs-devel/debbugs communication (was: New Package for NonGNU-ELPA: clojure-ts-mode) Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2023 21:06:19 -0700 Message-ID: References: <87il9kksqz.fsf@dfreeman.email> <83zg2vav46.fsf@gnu.org> <87o7j99304.fsf@dfreeman.email> <97224c4f-fad4-ae01-46c1-5755d97d9a92@gutov.dev> <87fs3ztq38.fsf@localhost> <87cyz3qwba.fsf@posteo.net> <8734zztmiz.fsf@localhost> <87sf7zqs3l.fsf@yahoo.com> <87il8vs6e7.fsf@localhost> <87jztbqrc9.fsf@yahoo.com> <877cpbs5a0.fsf@localhost> <87fs3zqqgj.fsf@yahoo.com> <874jkfs4o0.fsf@localhost> <87y1hroz47.fsf@posteo.net> <87wmx7mzcf.fsf@localhost> <8734ztpgru.fsf@dataswamp.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="9857"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" To: emacs-tangents@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-tangents-bounces+get-emacs-tangents=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Sep 05 06:06:55 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: get-emacs-tangents@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 1qdNL3-0002Jk-89 for get-emacs-tangents@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 05 Sep 2023 06:06:53 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qdNKi-0005zb-MO; Tue, 05 Sep 2023 00:06:32 -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 1qdNKd-0005zN-P9 for emacs-tangents@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Sep 2023 00:06:29 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-lj1-x22c.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::22c]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qdNKa-0001dt-3K for emacs-tangents@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Sep 2023 00:06:26 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-lj1-x22c.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2bbbe81185dso7031321fa.0 for ; Mon, 04 Sep 2023 21:06:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1693886781; x=1694491581; darn=gnu.org; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=0ttxzeSs+5m3P9eQ6MYzLRb9ZBbOoAYI5n8nBJj634w=; b=oRMJfB4Ahxi9sv9bs258386fvF5O4+cih7iYGbH49i0JzmGsd7zm2P3JSGKecpJvIS y2QC/tQI7B11XpRtAH0cuyunVv+E9vgXg7DU3z48jDdsHvxSXs+0YZxgmn4hl+xBuzJ3 m2D//z4ne+kYfSrMN6E1ORDnfqu3Hy6ydefmCTNggbinTJETvqLkjbqnuZAZXJaFaxvJ 9Phd1ioGaUH6vtKqnvjTDKqu/KTW4h+RbPJ+NwBeKGzAVxcfYp6BNnnT5UqP0Jzp+xjq MYCaiHjT9FUT51mo9msr3wynCQXOD/OHA9HphMF1iR5Q0g8op+O7UTAKJ9fozCs8sDH9 49lg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1693886781; x=1694491581; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=0ttxzeSs+5m3P9eQ6MYzLRb9ZBbOoAYI5n8nBJj634w=; b=kwNUP+lQvDBlM0oKbDAtzSQHyVs/AWLuZquH5ADCjfcrjE2NoDihCAhR3EoFOoLn0M VzbGxMiNq7dKAoCHkgBZG1UsNwFL88swHPVXGqiGggYhViZOskCXSDcZOJ50gjEfOrvN haqFieRz2FN5kpmT2J5kCkckUNACZ4xnmObyUo7FTkek6h2hFpl5orBaOmapUwx+bBs4 iwOlMHz5sEhPgGltZCZFJ6OLGH1bSyWYncvZsfJoi/0hGwPg5wSjJzdgf/nSAONvKWWF NArks59GXKEMYpROmmp/WZkvFdZM24emGOMbFMgMbw5opmINRDjXuayjhy5WSh3GY5Rn ihsg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzmB6LqvNsh0W6QdRSGV8KmZSHm7F/slXE0cfT6yNfxkfR1IUuV 0UgchW5lW92er6Uiho9z7sx4JHncBjPDNQm7DThugZR4eHzzXp// X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IH5xLV4ZbT72oCs3I+wuYQdzixMG5nB+4+V29jKqbvOnVotaydJm/ic1QS+wcGlEtKy35sLhGi8vRxU1p7ziQU= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4105:0:b0:500:9092:6d79 with SMTP id b5-20020ac24105000000b0050090926d79mr6774698lfi.4.1693886780629; Mon, 04 Sep 2023 21:06:20 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 2002:a05:6520:430e:b0:272:37a9:8c91 with HTTP; Mon, 4 Sep 2023 21:06:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <8734ztpgru.fsf@dataswamp.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::22c; envelope-from=samologist@gmail.com; helo=mail-lj1-x22c.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, 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-tangents@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs news and miscellaneous discussions outside the scope of other Emacs mailing lists List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-tangents-bounces+get-emacs-tangents=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-tangents-bounces+get-emacs-tangents=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.tangents:1047 Archived-At: i thought nobody serious about emacs suggests rewriting existing elisp but rather rebasing it? On 9/4/23, Emanuel Berg wrote: > Richard Stallman wrote: > >>> 1. Maintainers often say "no" to certain things (like code >>> refactoring that does not lead to any clear improvement) >>> because they know from their extensive experience that >>> some ideas are "non-starters". However, they do not >>> elaborate much why one or another thing is >>> not acceptable. >>> >>> Not elaborating is actually perfectly understandable - >>> it would be annoying to repeat the same thing many times >>> and would also waste the maintainer's valuable time that >>> could be spent for something more productive. >> >> I think I can understand why this feels painful -- but what >> concretely could we ask the maintainers to do which would be >> better overall? > > gnu.emacs.devel FAQ! > > I. BAD IDEAS AND WHY THEY ARE BAD > > 1. Idea: Drop Elisp, instead use SBCL for Emacs > > Argument: > > SBCL is faster and has parallelism for modern multicores. > We would be able to use everything the SBCL community has > developed. For the supposed Lisp editor, we would have the > most relentless and cruel Lisp on Earth, instead of the > half-goofy Elisp which some people think is just used to set > a bunch of options. > > Why it is STILL a bad idea: > > Elisp is now also very fast with native-compilation and it > is likely it will get even faster as that technology is > quite new, and is being actively developed. Elisp is also > much more portable than SBCL. The SBCL speed advantage and > parallelism relies on specific constructs the programmer has > to add explicitly in the code. So all our Joe Hacker's Elisp > wouldn't benefit from that in its current state. Not to > mention all our Joe Hacker's Elisp would have to be > re-written and adopted into SBCL. To re-write Emacs so that > its Lisp would be SBCL and not Elisp would be an insanely > big undertaking with a very unclear image what the result > would be. Remember, one shouldn't burn down the house to > kill the rats. Also, there are Emacs-like editors already > that are based on CL. So we are not doing it, goddammit! > > -- > underground experts united > https://dataswamp.org/~incal > > > -- The Kafka Pandemic A blog about science, health, human rights, and misopathy: https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com