From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Emanuel Berg Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Shrinking the C core Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2023 03:44:15 +0200 Message-ID: <87fs3ur9u8.fsf@dataswamp.org> References: <87ledwx7sh.fsf@yahoo.com> <877cpfybhf.fsf@yahoo.com> <873503y66i.fsf@yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="6350"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:j/vnlZ186CH6OlW/T2lJl5phjEk= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 04 04:21:44 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qczDj-0001QC-Es for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 04 Sep 2023 04:21:43 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qczCX-0004rk-TI; Sun, 03 Sep 2023 22:20:30 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qcydh-0005Jy-5I for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 03 Sep 2023 21:44:29 -0400 Original-Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qcyde-0006S1-Rp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 03 Sep 2023 21:44:28 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qcydb-0008ot-Vu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Sep 2023 03:44:23 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Mail-Copies-To: never Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 03 Sep 2023 22:20:28 -0400 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:310046 Archived-At: Richard Stallman wrote: >>> Would you please stop arguing for rewriting Emacs in >>> Common Lisp? It is a non-starter. > >> Can we not even talk about it? > > There are people who seem to be pressuring to rewrite GNU > Emacs in Common Lisp, and they kee pushing for it. They keeo > talking about the idea, and it feels like a demand. I get > the feeling that they think that by continuing to discuss > this as if it were a real option they hope to _make_ us take > the option seriously. That is feels like pressure. > > Would those would like to discuss that plseae take the > discssion off emacs-devel? Then it will not be pressure. It sounds like you have been traumatized, almost, by such discussion in the past, passibly? To be fair I don't think anyone is pushing for that. It would be to burn down the house to kill the rats. We should rather identify advantages SBCL has over Elisp and see if we can bridge that gap, possibly even using technology straight from their toolbox. As for speed I think we can conclude the native-compile feature is the solution, but it hasn't been taken to its full potential which is expected since it is quite new. As for the multicore processing thing, I wonder how they did that? And why can't we do that as well with Elisp? -- underground experts united https://dataswamp.org/~incal