From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "John Wiegley" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Taming some chaos Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 16:20:10 -0700 Organization: New Artisans LLC Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1445037749 31052 80.91.229.3 (16 Oct 2015 23:22:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 23:22:29 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 17 01:22:28 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 1ZnEKO-0001aS-8k for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 01:22:24 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56282 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnEKN-0007oN-KC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 19:22:23 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43500) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnEKD-0007Zs-14 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 19:22:14 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnEKB-0008EV-Id for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 19:22:12 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pa0-x234.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c03::234]:34687) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZnEKB-0008Dl-CO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 19:22:11 -0400 Original-Received: by pabws5 with SMTP id ws5so2740495pab.1 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 16:22:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:date:organization:message-id :references:user-agent:mail-followup-to:mime-version:content-type; bh=MmrdqwE9c3YdzqDf0Eufpz/C9q2bc9KOM9RQ8OJqwUw=; b=s4yreGybhgYniXQHlYxJKNBbbG7diMOHhBUcTBSkyiXqdKMNFSU7Gn/pSUxAo+qboZ gtxCBRfSEnaw1w7RgoJLBe2AN18ob5zefstthUb2esQMuu3F/YR0JfDi+TjcIjscU9+t OkxcNs8/EVM9uVoeV5T6/3/Zd2Esu/f8gPMHi4+RXDGalpDmTayiZDHyuOyeAY4TUrnY LA5MqZkI69OEaRklkfotv7jjzNY+OyloFUbBdWjv/HZn7nD/vd8XffIYjwic48qnFy5G BzJOsio30sYN6dgU/kA7ND+if3B0OlJLMuqjl2NqOfZ4CiR+Hq7EATmBQM8X5paUaK7A 2V1w== X-Received: by 10.68.93.194 with SMTP id cw2mr19410500pbb.36.1445037730498; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 16:22:10 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from Hermes-2.local (99-121-201-99.lightspeed.frokca.sbcglobal.net. [99.121.201.99]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id an5sm10866895pbd.45.2015.10.16.16.22.04 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 16 Oct 2015 16:22:09 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by Hermes-2.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 67BF64784431; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 16:21:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: (John Yates's message of "Wed, 14 Oct 2015 07:47:33 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (darwin) Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org 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:191801 Archived-At: >>>>> John Yates writes: > Apart from any IDE functionality there are general weaknesses in Emacs' > current collection of packages that I think represents a significant barrier > to bringing in new recruits, both users and developers. I want to argue that > most packages dabble in too many areas and are coded in too imperative a > manner. Such shortcoming can be understood in light of the era and > technological setting in which many Emacs conventions and paradigms were > first developed. But that does not alter the fact that the state of > computing / UX / what-have-you has advanced significantly. I can't really argue with your assessment, John. However, I think that ship has sailed. The changes you propose in your message would require a ground-up redesign of many aspects of Emacs, would they not? We have so much extant Emacs Lisp code, and lot of Emacs' value lies in that code, and not merely in its fundamentals. At this point, we can design new abstractions to be used by new code; but we can't change how fundamental things are done in a way that suddenly makes Emacs far less capable by breaking reams of existing code. John