From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Cool and Useful LISP for the .emacs file Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 15:59:19 GMT Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1068480952 29650 80.91.224.253 (10 Nov 2003 16:15:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 16:15:52 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 10 17:15:50 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AJEhh-0005wD-00 for ; Mon, 10 Nov 2003 17:15:49 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AJFef-0003ee-W1 for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:16:45 -0500 Original-Path: shelby.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!cyclone.bc.net!snoopy.risq.qc.ca!charlie.risq.qc.ca!53ab2750!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help Original-Lines: 13 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 132.204.24.42 Original-X-Complaints-To: abuse@umontreal.ca Original-X-Trace: charlie.risq.qc.ca 1068479959 132.204.24.42 (Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:59:19 EST) Original-NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:59:19 EST Original-Xref: shelby.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:118055 Original-To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 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 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:13994 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.help:13994 > My point was that the rut occupied by C, python, perl, etc is wide and > shallow compared to the rather narrow and deep rut occupied by lisp. Seeing how much trouble you seem to have getting from your C rut to elisp's, I have a hard time understanding why you consider the C rut as being wide and shallow. I still haven't heard from a Lisp hacker who found it difficult to switch to C or Java (painful, yes of course, but not difficult, except maybe for manual memory management), so I'd say that Lisp's rut is rather shallow indeed. Stefan