Re: guile and emacs and elisp, oh my!

[David Engster]

David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:
> David Engster <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Tom Tromey <address@hidden> writes:
>>> I think it is beneficial to a program like Emacs to have a single
>>> extension language.  A single language makes both reuse and debugging
>>> simpler.  Multiple languages equals chaos.
>>
>> I tend to agree. The priority should be to make Emacs Lisp more
>> powerful, for example by adding stuff from the CL library to the
>> language core.
>
> The cl library is an incredibly complex hack.  It makes debugging and
> figuring out things quite harder.
>
> It makes more sense to switch to a system which deals with such
> complexity in more straightforward ways.
>
> So I tend to see your wish of "make Emacs Lisp more powerful instead" as
> more expensive and painful in the long run.

With "stuff from the CL library" I'm not talking about features like
'lexical-let' or even the whole thing. What I'd really like to see, at
least in the short term, are things like 'remove-if', 'delete-if',
'every', 'notany', 'count', 'loop', etc. . I know that the
implementation of those often uses CL keywords, which is why Richard
didn't want them in Emacs Lisp, at least not in the current form.

-David