Re: Emacs rewrite in a maintainable language

[John Wiegley]

>>>>> Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

> On second thought, I don't think I understand the idea at all. What does it
> mean "a Lispy language, easy to learn"? Is it a Lisp dialect, or is it C
> with a set of Lisp-like macros preprocessed into C? What exactly are the C
> aspects that we are trying to save the programmer from? And which part(s) of
> the core do we expect to be able to rewrite in this "Lispy" language?

Picture what we currently write in C, but a Lisp syntax, and all the macros we
currently use removed. So, the essence of our C, written like it was Lisp.

If that Lisp can get close enough to Emacs Lisp, so that knowing one means
knowing the other, we've just made it easier for anyone to write what we now
have to write in C.

I can imagine that complex things, like type declarations, would be done with
anti-quoted blocks, or by direct support for inclusion of header files.

John