From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Emacs rewrite in a maintainable language Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 13:40:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <11a21a29-f4e7-4c75-9c63-b55f535d6a91@default> References: <561A19AB.5060001@cumego.com> <87io6dl0h0.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87lhb82qxc.fsf@gmail.com> <87oag4jk74.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87k2qrki45.fsf@wanadoo.es> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1444682471 17898 80.91.229.3 (12 Oct 2015 20:41:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 20:41:11 +0000 (UTC) To: John Wiegley , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 12 22:40:59 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 1Zljtz-0008Mj-Ia for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 22:40:59 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58697 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zljty-0002Mu-Ui for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 16:40:59 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37554) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zljtu-0002Mo-Up for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 16:40:55 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zljtr-0005iV-GC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 16:40:54 -0400 Original-Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:21261) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zljtr-0005iJ-AA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 16:40:51 -0400 Original-Received: from userv0021.oracle.com (userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id t9CKemd1009970 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 12 Oct 2015 20:40:49 GMT Original-Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72]) by userv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t9CKel4W002342 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 12 Oct 2015 20:40:47 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0011.oracle.com (abhmp0011.oracle.com [141.146.116.17]) by userv0121.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t9CKel7H026808; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 20:40:47 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9 (901082) [OL 12.0.6691.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 141.146.126.69 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:191398 Archived-At: > > This way, whenever someone needs fast code, he would use this other > > dialect instead of writing C, or the slow Elisp (or avoiding the > > task altogether.) >=20 > If it can leverage what the contributor already knows about Elisp, > I'm all for it. I wonder what RMS' and Eli's reaction would be. I'm not for it. I guess it depends on just how "whenever someone needs fast code" is interpreted, in practice. I do not wish to see Emacs core developers start opting for something like this instead of using Lisp, with the excuse that they want their given code to be "fast". That would be an unwelcome blow to Emacs, the extendable, customizable editor. Emacs is in Lisp for the sake of its users, above all. The only difference today between implementation language and user language is the C code. I think of that (relatively small) bit of code as essentially a necessary evil. Emacs _is_ a Lisp environment. This has been the case since before the existence of Lisp machines. It is no accident that the development of Emacs (in various flavors) went hand in hand with Lisp development. > compilation into C for some of the functions we have in Emacs > core This is backwards from the direction we have been moving with Stefan and Eli, which is toward moving core stuff from C to Lisp when possible. > (that is, reimplementing them as a proof of concept), OTOH, if it's _only_ to test POC, then I suppose it's hard to object. But I would not want to see compiling core Lisp code to the proposed language be taken seriously. That would be a step backward, IMO. Leave such code in Lisp, please. And move more core code to Lisp, when that is feasible. (As Eli has noted, most of the C code cannot feasibly be moved to Lisp.) > that would help sell it. To whom are you trying to sell it? What's the point? Emacs is too slow? C is too hard to maintain? To be clear, if it is a question of using such a language _only_ for the equivalent of what C is _necessarily_ used for, it's hard to object. But if it is just to have "fast" core code, where that code could be in Lisp instead, then I object, as one user.