[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Emacs and Guile status (was Re: Guile is a great idea, but where's t

From: Tim Johnson
Subject: Re: Emacs and Guile status (was Re: Guile is a great idea, but where's the community?)
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 13:36:00 -0900
User-agent: Mutt/1.4i

* Ken Raeburn <address@hidden> [040101 14:14]:
> There was a bit of push-back from some of the Emacs developers, too.
> Some "Guile compatibility might be nice, but no way are we going to
> even consider replacing the working Lisp engine" (something I'm merely
> hoping to defer any decisions or arguments on for a while), some "what
> a waste of effort, nobody cares about Guile or Scheme" type attitudes,
> "don't fix what ain't broke", etc.  Others, including RMS, do seem to
> want at least the Guile compatibility.  (Well, unless things have
> changed in the past year or so.)

  My observations aren't backed by direct experience, since I am just
  beginning to learn to use xemacs, elisp, and especially scheme/guile.
  However, what I have observed and been told, is that the fracture
  between the GNU Emacs and Xemacs community has been in part paved over
  by those who are trying to address differences in implementation,
  and (hopefully) learn from each other's implementation.

  I'm glad to see that RMS is favorable about this, that must be the
  biggest hurdle. I'm quoting below from /elisp_4.html#SEC7 of the GNU
  Emacs Lisp Reference:

  " Emacs Lisp is not at all influenced by Scheme; but the GNU project has
    an implementation of Scheme, called Guile. We use Guile in all new GNU
    software that calls for extensibility. 
  That's RMS speaking, I presume.


Tim Johnson <address@hidden>

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]