Re: Is Emacs very alive, active and improving?

[Emanuel Berg]

Kai Großjohann <kai.grossjohann@gmx.net> writes:

>> "A complete rewrite..." Wouldn't that be a total
>> disaster? Why would you do that? Because of hardware
>> changes? Portability? Please explain :)
>
> If the programmers don't know how to write
> maintainable code and don't know how to refactor, then
> the code gets worse and worse and at one point needs
> to be rewritten.  I heard that's not so uncommon for
> commercial software projects.

FOSS code is in general better than commercial code. Not
by much, but it has been affirmed. Also, Emacs is
written in C with Lisp on top of it. It seems like a
solid architecture. Also, lots of people say C++, and
not C, is the modular, reusable, etc., etc., programming
language. But that's no my experience.

But, all that techno-techno-science amount to close to
zero in incapable hands. But in this case, didn't RMS
even wrote the C compiler? He is the only guy I know (by
name), but I think there was a, ehm, "herd" of very
dedicated (fanatical perhaps) programmers.

If Emacs will run into a dead-end and had to be
rewritten because of poor software I will be chocked!

-- 
Emanuel Berg, programmer-for-rent. CV, projects, etc at uXu
underground experts united:  http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573