Re: unimportant question: CL versus Scheme

[Gerd Moellmann]

address@hidden (Kai Großjohann) writes:

> On 14 May 2001, Gerd Moellmann wrote:
> 
> > My personal opinion is that it would be a mistake to try to replace
> > ELisp with a different language; there's just too much ELisp out
> > there which breaks even with small changes of semantics.
> 
> That's right.  I think the idea of the CLEmacs project by Erik
> Naggum was to provide an ELisp emulation layer which automatically
> takes effect for *.el files.  And I presume that the Guile-Emacs
> project had something similar in mind.

There's nothing to say against people having visions.  But, IMHO, the
vision of putting an ELisp reimplementation into a layer or to emulate
ELisp doesn't really solve anything by itself.