Re: Guile in Emacs

[David Kastrup]

Christian Lynbech <address@hidden> writes:

>>>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Lord <address@hidden> writes:
>
>>> Wouldn't it be about as good (and probably less work), to give up on the
>>> guile idea and evolve emacs lisp (with Miles's lexical-bind changes, and
>>> (one hopes) multithreading, and maybe other things)?
>
> Thomas> I dunno.  Maybe.  I'd guess that, no, that's not a 
> Thomas> good strategy.   Four reasons come quickly to mind: ...
>
> Wouldn't a reasonable alternative to using a scheme implementation be to
> use a Common Lisp ditto? And wouldn't that be a much closer fit
> semantically to the current Emacs Lisp dialect?

Emacs Lisp is streamlined for editing.  Common Lisp has its own focus.
For an extension language, it is preferable to have a system where you
can read through the manual in one day and basically understand it.

Scheme is a smaller starting point than Common Lisp.

-- 
David Kastrup