From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alexis Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs rewrite in a maintainable language Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 19:54:26 +1100 Message-ID: <87mvvppyyl.fsf@gmail.com> References: <561A19AB.5060001@cumego.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1444553691 30718 80.91.229.3 (11 Oct 2015 08:54:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 08:54:51 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 11 10:54:43 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 1ZlCOv-0007zR-4w for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 10:54:41 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47632 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZlCOu-0008Pp-JO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 04:54:40 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35281) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZlCOq-0008Pk-Pk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 04:54:37 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZlCOm-0001SV-NY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 04:54:36 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pa0-x234.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c03::234]:36311) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZlCOm-0001SR-Ha for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 04:54:32 -0400 Original-Received: by pablk4 with SMTP id lk4so126780839pab.3 for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 01:54:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=references:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=pooVGHd2qG/klUOR5YJOkzloGfYARS+i+okhtq1DUOI=; b=JUHl1XSVltN4pnvQ7Vc5/jdzwW+IWcAoKyzJvMwm2Wu7V+msg+aVu0MTBejJpn3QQg /1NHY7XkkGChLsXs99SsPfGKILKkU6p6ddHiqD60aeojGzOYVINv1S9F0qc4I0tN37Fk ObUh7L1FWksbdiOOC3R/lXy2gxz8XLl736VViAlSm7Y6MU2qRzN3b+FqohF+wy0ZF+97 ar/jsiwJhcaklaZi9axXr0/lQYaigj5e4wH2s/mhi70jZKeZL8tN+pD0UxzRtSWnoOka Z3rLxTyhZGPrF/NY1gBta2I+mhJaaIkXVPWWFdCy99WttEaxY2ySW6uYpR4QFrXV+5bC EUOA== X-Received: by 10.68.69.40 with SMTP id b8mr27456076pbu.84.1444553671562; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 01:54:31 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from localhost (CPE-58-161-15-29.cqqy2.win.bigpond.net.au. [58.161.15.29]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id xm4sm11924627pab.27.2015.10.11.01.54.29 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 11 Oct 2015 01:54:30 -0700 (PDT) In-reply-to: <561A19AB.5060001@cumego.com> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:400e:c03::234 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:191201 Archived-At: Przemysław Wojnowski writes: > Recently I was going through Emacs C code and immediately one > thing come to my mind: "Did anyone consider rewrite it a more > maintainable language?" :-) > > Did anyone consider pros/cons of having base code in other > language? AFAIK maintenance cost of C code is pretty high, > because the code is tangled, has no tests and the language has > its limits (e.g. no namespaces, no abstractions, > etc.). Maintaining that and adding new features will be harder > and harder. > > Having Emacs base code in a more maintainable language (maybe > some Scheme version?) would reduce maintenance cost over the > years. Also more maintainable code makes it easier for others to > joins and improve it. In my experience, this suggestion comes up regularly; here's a brief comment i wrote on this topic about a year ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/emacs/comments/2l1gp6/so_why_moving_the_code_base_of_emacs_to_another/clqp6p9 Alexis.