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: What's missing in ELisp that makes people want to use cl-lib? Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2023 03:21:30 +0100 Message-ID: <87y1ffh905.fsf@dataswamp.org> References: <46ab3c7d-d820-4bb4-8ec4-97c614d7c8a0@alphapapa.net> <871qd8sfdx.fsf@posteo.net> <838r7g8pys.fsf@gnu.org> <87bkcbrgnr.fsf@posteo.net> <25924.21015.19614.951576@orion.rgrjr.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="40483"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:wUnugS91Xxr9lVIcKxNWzk/uGBg= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 03 07:34:56 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 1qynlg-000AE3-6h for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 03 Nov 2023 07:34:56 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qynlS-0006Oj-Az; Fri, 03 Nov 2023 02:34:42 -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 1qyjoc-0004NY-Iu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Nov 2023 22:21:42 -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 1qyjoa-00034F-Pn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Nov 2023 22:21:42 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qyjoX-0004mY-S8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Nov 2023 03:21:37 +0100 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, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 03 Nov 2023 02:34:41 -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:312144 Archived-At: Bob Rogers wrote: > I think we are not really talking about arbitrary decisions > here, but about language style decisions, which may seem > arbitrary (especially if you disagree with the style of the > resulting language!) but do matter to the consistency and > coherence of the resulting language. And, although my > experience only goes back to Emacs 18, I think the original > Emacs Lisp had a definite style that set it apart from other > Lisp dialects. But that was a long time ago, and Emacs Lisp > has grown enormously (as someone else pointed out early in > the original thread) to support the enormous growth in > Emacs, so that original style is now much harder to see. > (Indeed, I notice it mostly when updating my old code.) So let's hear it then, what is it that sets Emacs 18 Elisp apart from Emacs 30 Elisp > So, Richard, I see that you are fighting to preserve > something real and important -- your vision of Emacs Lisp as > a coherent language -- and how is the Emacs 30 Elisp less coherent than the Emacs 18 Elisp? -- underground experts united https://dataswamp.org/~incal