Re: Emacs rewrite in a maintainable language

[David Kastrup]

Tom Tromey <address@hidden> writes:

> Stephen> If we can really rewrite all of Emacs with the exception of device
> Stephen> drivers in Guile, then I'd definitely be excited (I think that's what
> Stephen> Tom Tromey is talking about).
>
> No, I'm interested in writing Emacs in Emacs Lisp and evolving Emacs
> Lisp in place; and against the Guile/Emacs thing, for basically the
> same reasons as Daniel.

Well, I may have limited comprehension, but the reasons I remember from
Daniel were mostly in the "Do not want" and "we could do something
similar if we worked hard enough" category.

Basically, fear of merging and the unknown.  Since the whole point was
to _stop_ working on compiler/optimizer/language details that are more
encompassingly solved in a system with a less heckish history as Emacs
Lisp, I am not convinced.

The main problem I see is that we have two communities who are quite
unenthusiastic about letting the respective other project shape vital
aspects of their own project.

Which is a problem.  I think that both projects would move considerably
out of their specialist corner if this worked out, gaining wider appeal
and acceptance as "serious" software useful for more than special
purposes.

-- 
David Kastrup