Re: redisplay system of emacs

[David Kastrup]

"Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden> writes:

> grischka writes:
>
>  > But as is, emacs comes with an implicit structural clause to its
>  > license, as in "[You may convey a work based on the Program, ...]
>  > BUT WE DO OUR BEST TO PREVENT THAT."
>
> That's simply not true.  There have historically been a large number
> of editors based on Emacs code, some of which are in active
> development (of course XEmacs is an example, and many wilder
> alternatives have existed: pymacs, perlmacs).

Maybe the point was that it is not trivial to get home-brewn extensions
back into Emacs upstream.  In particular, if they have been brewed in
somebody else's home...

> I can say to those who say "we can rebuild Emacs using third-party
> libraries and it would be more maintainable and flexible" that XEmacs
> has tried that several times for different areas of functionality, and
> for one reason or another the code has always come back out again.

Thanks for that data point.

> As for browsing 1GB (well, for Emacs it would be 256MB, I guess?)

most-positive-fixnum => 536870911

> log files, there's nothing like (X)Emacs!

less is better, actually.  I need my virtual memory for other things
than decorated log files.

-- 
David Kastrup