Re: Issues with emacs

[Pascal J. Bourguignon]

rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> writes:

> On Jun 22, 8:26 pm, "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <p...@informatimago.com>
> wrote:
>> What's bad, is that the promise of having different embedded languages
>> in emacs failed so far.  IMO because of lack of lexical binding/closures
>> (but this is resolved in emacs-24), and to a lesser degree, lack of a
>> usable namespace system (in this case, the obarray mechanism is there to
>> be used by language implementors).  But with emacs-24, it could be
>> possible to implement a scheme, a javascript and finish the emacs-cl
>> implementation, java, etc, so that people could use and program emacs in
>> their favorite programming language.
>
> Yes this is one of the important issues.  If emacs were programmable
> in one of today's popular languages its developer-base would leap up.
> I believe however that trying to implement everything within emacs
> (elisp) itself is a much more ambitious project than simply providing
> bridges to existing implementations (eg python via pymacs)

It's a question of VM.

That's the reason why I'd like a rewrite of emacs (C code) into Common
Lisp: there are various CL implementations providing various different
VMs, including ix86.

-- 
__Pascal Bourguignon__                     http://www.informatimago.com/
A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.