From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs rewrite in a maintainable language Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 22:52:21 +0300 Message-ID: <8337xa616y.fsf@gnu.org> References: <561A19AB.5060001@cumego.com> <87io6dl0h0.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87lhb82qxc.fsf@gmail.com> <87oag4jk74.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87k2qrki45.fsf@wanadoo.es> <8737xf9je9.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87pp0fm0j3.fsf@gnu.org> <87r3kusx8z.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83lhb26eb9.fsf@gnu.org> <876126key3.fsf@gnu.org> <83fv1a6bfu.fsf@gnu.org> <5621513B.8060108@cumego.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii 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 1445025161 8023 80.91.229.3 (16 Oct 2015 19:52:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 19:52:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ludo@gnu.org, dak@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?utf-8?Q?Przemys=C5=82aw?= Wojnowski Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 16 21:52:32 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 1ZnB3H-0008EO-BZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 21:52:31 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55616 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnB3G-0001QL-5H for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:52:30 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59578) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnB3D-0001Q8-BX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:52:28 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnB3C-0003xL-C7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:52:27 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il ([80.179.55.175]:44797) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnB37-0003rf-75; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:52:21 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NWB00800VYWEG00@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 22:52:19 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.94.185.246]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NWB008MNWJ6DC20@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 22:52:19 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <5621513B.8060108@cumego.com> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 X-Received-From: 80.179.55.175 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:191786 Archived-At: > Cc: dak@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Przemys=C5=82aw Wojnowski > Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 21:34:19 +0200 >=20 > W dniu 16.10.2015 o 18:11, Eli Zaretskii pisze: > > In any case, Emacs can never be satisfied with the current Guile > > infrastructure for i18n. There are too many shortcomings, some o= f > > them were mentioned here. Yes, Guile can be fixed to be better i= n > > that area, but no one is working on that, AFAIK, and what's more > > important, lead Guile developers don't even agree Guile should mo= ve in > > that direction. (This especially puzzles me: to have a good exam= ple > > before you and not follow it? Emacs learned what it has now the = hard > > way, have paid in blood, sweat and tears for that knowledge, and = still > > Guile developers think they "know better"? Present parties exclu= ded, > > of course.) >=20 > Is i18n the only obstacle? The only major one I know of. There are quite a few minor ones, whic= h will also have to be handled. In general, Guile is much less portabl= e to non-GNU/Linux systems than Emacs. > IOW if someone would improve Guile's i18n infrastructure to match t= hat of > Emacs, would it be included into Emacs? Including Guile in Emacs is a project by itself, regardless of features missing from Guile itself. > To be clear, I'm not asking to make a pressure on you, but only in = context of > motivation. If someone would know that i18n is the only obstacle, m= aybe this > person(s) would find motivation to do the job. Without that it is d= iscouraging. >=20 > This way or another, a clear decision would be helpful here. "Yes, = we want > if...", "No, we don't want, because...". At least it would clarify = everything > and close the topic. Theoretically, there's no problem: Guile is _the_ GNU extension language, so accepting it in Emacs is a no-brainer. Practically, I see no reason to make any decisions until someone come= s up and publishes a repository where all the necessary work has been done. There's a person working on that, on and off, but that job is far from complete.