From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Christopher Dimech Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: 10 problems with Elisp, part 10 (was: Re: Emacs website, Lisp, and other) Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2024 20:58:19 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87sevj9b50.fsf@jeremybryant.net> <871q33rj7v.fsf@dataswamp.org> <86ed73qhly.fsf@gnu.org> <87frrjoryg.fsf_-_@dataswamp.org> <86wmkuq60j.fsf@gnu.org> <87a5hqq4v3.fsf@dataswamp.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="38151"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Emanuel Berg Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 05 20:59:01 2024 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 1sb2v7-0009jq-3s for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 05 Aug 2024 20:59:01 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sb2ub-0001FP-PX; Mon, 05 Aug 2024 14:58:29 -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 1sb2uZ-0001Ez-T0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Aug 2024 14:58:28 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.19]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sb2uX-0004xt-Tn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Aug 2024 14:58:27 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmx.com; s=s31663417; t=1722884299; x=1723489099; i=dimech@gmx.com; bh=dJ+mzKhtwVH4NNrky8+3fV0WRr01Q30r3EbeAEmFTwo=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:MIME-Version:Message-ID:From:To:Cc:Subject: Content-Type:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Transfer-Encoding:cc:content-transfer-encoding: content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject: to; b=dMOAqTopzVoPXl2np88KWIWC1q/TXTCeGDiB0ZjMQgnWXfgOVYwOzX1h3MPF2iJU uMSytTUJQRqiubdIztYCGmoEGbrLggruBCJ3um/4JouBTfI1YAJAZ61a7pMPOtSjR eq7ZkrpQf+GqDORA0suYjaEEp0UszdeVy1SlKpUK+oeu9mB9lG3ni7kFDdlvgwTXt ysGAJdxPHPbcA33pLCaiP/v7gcjjXmAPuLOOY6CQcPaajG85LY1jfYF5wZhL5pZ6R A5EWQej/l/Bna4SpU840S0lrVohmSaZRUe6W5OpODJUBHz7ZX0qoO2AsBKYYV0S7I e7WdN/KSv8GA7Wb9Ug== X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a Original-Received: from [92.251.79.197] ([92.251.79.197]) by web-mail.gmx.net (3c-app-mailcom-bs04.server.lan [172.19.170.170]) (via HTTP); Mon, 5 Aug 2024 20:58:19 +0200 Importance: normal Sensitivity: Normal In-Reply-To: <87a5hqq4v3.fsf@dataswamp.org> X-UI-Message-Type: mail X-Priority: 3 X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:6T9S4VKNvjXcZVKo1VfqxRq8G7x1wXLQGRwIytv7mjDaCvH9+l7gYls9TXzr1hyqTW3jg +/cdohs7HuNBsdQWfCQYfj74DLvGVB+qZzfHpGmfrq7937j1xw0KrWyY0xUEDbcq9QrcwN5vRNq0 DMYilPs+8HLsDUFmDIWqGIpdZWbTra4xCniTtrxofq6tOgRftLldoZsjAgVsnnxBnmoqp02QGFOS wJgs1KrwmjbmyWBDDb+BwkuR1xXEoTr/LhpMhdmpRCmfgJmbgSTrjPcblFT7pMZqiXKDTrBE2WxS oU= UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:MzBQtjDpcNg=;OJ1TVIKzsiBf605e3/iCDki1II2 rMlbsddvzSG76CnQw3tas2Flm+YWUgisKZkvOubfVgUUrY3SfMWKwDHGyOUWTxaYFgcT0+8z+ MtoteQslxiUilBxd0P/RrJGR3x2z/5RsclrRt2i4ld12KykbNUb94vuIKfVK1rF/qBxqWVa+D IdJkGVYjt9edKnfDRZwG2qIfsdFEHeHDdP+RGcPcdcZWRj1knvAKVqhAzBiB4MPnCaz25A2IH dYUFFr2kiKlEyjkdusVIKWKoqgWKl7ivmzNAZfIQkPDl9oMLPRtBDQV0MvPxlnlZoqoZTbj4z MwFf2jCedz0ecLeFKbymyOm0CbdQIdMiWQ5/xi56s/n1V2crbNTurjbtUqYZcyzpBG71kITr6 36wnyTEerXC+DG4GO9Q4av32ydTmHlxH3+wiP/0P2qu86c6Ngt6icFAhHc5owJtiFg4FPfiqu 9iOG6SYM9UtjlxaT+ulUFdjvmzJtKC/MmmOSgd7UGxRQB4fMBZ1yon9+iguwj+XyA+/bW/ha/ 7SSs7ZMWWYKHWjV4QhCtHmxgDeLnIbAYIhuRlJFsprQHcdBMFelfUr9+LIcndSD9cUy4qDlV9 1f5nXls3xMJb81a9M5OOY3W4ddqHlvNKcAEd4nF5BErf6b6pCtPCFmJzIlGSlP84KQkWVahZs eb1f1q6kFOUJJAj0go+1spdFX7VzSmcbIKZTCCbqmA== Received-SPF: pass client-ip=212.227.15.19; envelope-from=dimech@gmx.com; helo=mout.gmx.net X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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:322408 Archived-At: > Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2024 at 5:03 AM > From: "Emanuel Berg" > To: emacs-devel@gnu.org > Subject: Re: 10 problems with Elisp, part 10 (was: Re: Emacs website, Li= sp, and other) > > Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > There's nothing more natural than an editor analyzing text > > in a buffer. Why it frustrates you is beyond me. > > Sure, as is analyzing chemical substances in chemistry. > > And it is well known that instead of using machines and > well-known methods from the outside to do the job, the > chemists are swimming around in the substances mucking around > with individual molecules giving explicit instructions what > should happen for each case? > > Oh, no, all computing is the same, basically, we have of > course specific problems and applications here, but instead of > doing the old thing we should move up one level of abstraction > and be there instead, and focus not on "getting the job done" > but instead getting it done in a way that is much better than > what we - to a large extent - have been doing so far. > > Everyone has a problem domain with specific characteristics > that isn't the same as do stuff on the detail level, > "everyone" doesn't do that if that is what you thought. > > > Emacs Lisp is not a general-purpose programming language. > > It doesn't matter what it is, it can be better, we should aim > for that. > > > It is a language for implementing Emacs and Emacs > > extensions. Thus, comparing it with Python is, in general, > > simply wrong. > > Yes, Python is incomparable to Emacs Lisp and would probably > win quite even against the collective Lisp world, I'm afraid. Python is not great. But people can believe what they want. Sometimes we discover unpleasant truths. Whenever we do so, we are in difficulties: suppressing them is scientifically dishonest, so we must tell them, but telling them, however, will fire back on us. If the truths are sufficiently impalatable, our audience is psychically incapable of accepting them and we will be written off as totally unrealistic, hopelessly idealistic, dangerously revolutionary, foolishly gullible or what have you. Most Computer Science Departments have opted for the easy way out, to pretend that problems do not exist. Programming is one of the most difficult branches of applied mathematics; most mathematicians should better remain pure mathematicians. It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students that have had a prior exposure to Python, as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration. In the good old days physicists repeated each other's experiments, just to be sure. Today they stick to Python, so that they can share each other's programs, bugs included. > Lisp would probably loose to some other languages as well. > > > We can compare a few specific aspects, but not the languages > > as a whole, and definitely not their success rate: the scope > > of Emacs Lisp is limited to Emacs, which is orders of > > magnitude more narrow than the scope of Python (or any other > > general-purpose programming language). > > Emacs is the bastion of Lisp, if we care about Lisp we should > do what we can to make Elisp more competitive altho we should > focus on getting better, and not compare us to other languages > as we are way too far behind in many areas, I'm afraid. > > -- > underground experts united > https://dataswamp.org/~incal > > >