Re: Emacs rewrite in a maintainable language

[Daniel Colascione <dancol@dancol.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1259 bytes --]

On 10/12/2015 05:48 AM, Oleh Krehel wrote:
> Óscar Fuentes <ofv@wanadoo.es> writes:
> 
>> Replacing C with a language that helps people to write readable, safe,
>> efficient and maintainable code without having to study the existing
>> code base for months looks quite appealing to me. That replacement could
>> be gradual (no "stopping the world while The Big Rewrite is underway.")
>> If that language is not so popular as C, that's no big problem as long
>> as it makes things less daunting for those willing to work on the Emacs
>> core. As already said, there is no dramatic shortage of people who learn
>> Elisp just for hacking Emacs.
> 
> I think slowly moving the Emacs C core to C++ is a good idea.  The two
> languages are supposed to be largely compile-compatible, i.e. g++ can
> understand what was meant for gcc.

Not generally --- C++ has no implicit void cast. I very much think that
this whole thread is a giant waste of time. We have a core that works
perfectly well. We should focus on things that actually matter, not
arguing about things that will never change, or worse, changing massive
amounts of code for no good reason.

I'm firmly opposed to a move to C++. If you want a higher-level
language, use elisp.


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]