Re: Emacs rewrite in a maintainable language

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: David Kastrup <address@hidden>
> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:01:50 +0200
> 
> > If it can leverage what the contributor already knows about Elisp, I'm
> > all for it. I wonder what RMS' and Eli's reaction would be.
> 
> There is the GUILE branch.

First, Guile's Scheme is not Emacs Lisp, there are significant
differences.

Second, Guile itself is written in C, so what exactly is gained here?

Third, AFAIR the Guile branch doesn't replace all of Emacs's C core.

Fourth, that branch is far from ready for prime time (as you know and
point out).

> GUILE's byte compiler is supposed to do a better job than Elisp.

But for now it has known problems with ELisp (some tests fail).  Also,
at least Guile's own byte code (the *.go files) are not
architecture-independent, so building a Guile Emacs will need a long
compilation on the target machine.  Not a catastrophe, but hardly a
nice thing.