From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: guile and emacs and elisp, oh my! Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 09:37:55 +0200 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1271835512 12322 80.91.229.12 (21 Apr 2010 07:38:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 07:38:32 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Andy Wingo , "emacs-devel@gnu.org" To: Tom Tromey Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 21 09:38:30 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O4UVw-0006Nk-T5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 09:38:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53266 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O4UVv-0007dB-Jv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 03:38:27 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1O4UVj-0007W1-QD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 03:38:15 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=57183 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O4UVd-0007LU-UR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 03:38:15 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O4UVc-00081R-4C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 03:38:09 -0400 Original-Received: from ebb06.tieto.com ([131.207.168.38]:58306) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O4UVb-00080N-UY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 03:38:08 -0400 X-AuditID: 83cfa826-b7c95ae000001320-d9-4bceab5c1af8 Original-Received: from FIHGA-EXHUB01.eu.tieto.com ( [131.207.136.34]) by ebb06.tieto.com (SMTP Mailer) with SMTP id C8.54.04896.C5BAECB4; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 10:38:04 +0300 (EEST) Original-Received: from uw000509 (10.48.99.3) by inbound.tieto.com (131.207.136.49) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.2.176.0; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 10:38:04 +0300 In-Reply-To: (Tom Tromey's message of "Wed, 21 Apr 2010 01:36:34 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.1.95 (gnu/linux) X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:123961 Archived-At: I think there are a number of benefits to rebasing Emacs Lisp to a more commonly used platform, even if this will not be immediately visible to the casual user, some of the more obvious (as already hashed out in the other discussions): - If elisp is fast enough today, it is to some extent because *lots* of functionality has moved to the C world. A faster implementation (with a FFI) would allow to take more of the internals back and hence allow gerater flexbility and more room for improvement. - Developer resources are limited, teaming up with an existing platform will provide more hands on the internals and hence free up time for the emacs specific work. - Having access to a more widely used language will enable non-emacs libraries to be imported into emacs or emacs libraries to be used elsewhere. For instance the buffer abstraction is one that probaly is useful in a number of applications. I am not able to say if standardizing on a single language platform across the GNU project makes sense or not. It probably will be very difficult to decide on one particular language but having a common platform with multiple languages sitting on top at least will enable a considerable amount of work to be shared among application development. It will take time and energy to change the language machinery of Emacs but we should not forget that a significant portion of that effort has already been spent and that one also should not underestimate the effort needed to make the needed high-quality extensions to Emacs Lisp on the existing implementation and to maintain them afterwards across the vast score of platforms on which Emacs runs today. ------------------------+----------------------------------------------------- Christian Lynbech | christian #\@ defun #\. dk ------------------------+----------------------------------------------------- Hit the philistines three times over the head with the Elisp reference manual. - petonic@hal.com (Michael A. Petonic)