From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: juliewith Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: How close is elisp to CL now? Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 15:16:53 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1355181413343-272278.post@n5.nabble.com> References: <1355157429559-272247.post@n5.nabble.com> <87mwxlinzm.fsf@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1355181422 26964 80.91.229.3 (10 Dec 2012 23:17:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 23:17:02 +0000 (UTC) To: Help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 11 00:17:16 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@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 1TiCb4-0004I5-7k for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 11 Dec 2012 00:17:14 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53600 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TiCar-0003TR-JI for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 18:17:01 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:60633) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TiCal-0003TE-7T for Help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 18:16:57 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TiCak-0005Ys-9A for Help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 18:16:55 -0500 Original-Received: from sam.nabble.com ([216.139.236.26]:37717) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TiCak-0005YG-3y for Help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 18:16:54 -0500 Original-Received: from [192.168.236.26] (helo=sam.nabble.com) by sam.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TiCaj-0005iT-Cr for Help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 15:16:53 -0800 In-Reply-To: <87mwxlinzm.fsf@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 216.139.236.26 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:88124 Archived-At: Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote > But IMO, it would be simplier and will give a better results (both > technically and politically) to reimplement the emacs VM (all the GNU > emacs C code) in Common Lisp, than to Common-lispify GNU emacs. > It does seem odd that emacs, being so powerful and such a world unto itself, would have a junior version of Common Lisp. I can't help but believe elisp's limitations are a huge drag on emacs overall. I vote for a CL makeover too. -- View this message in context: http://emacs.1067599.n5.nabble.com/How-close-is-elisp-to-CL-now-tp272247p272278.html Sent from the Emacs - Help mailing list archive at Nabble.com.