[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: JACAL, scm
From: |
Rob Browning |
Subject: |
Re: JACAL, scm |
Date: |
Tue, 02 Oct 2001 14:53:40 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.090004 (Oort Gnus v0.04) Emacs/20.7 |
Tom Lord <address@hidden> writes:
> I can offer some "historical" answers, based on decisions made in
> the early days of the project. I think these historical answers are
> good ones -- they ought to still be in effect.
Thanks for the info. That helps and adds to some of what I already
knew.
>From my perspective, here's all that I'm really interested in
determining wrt the #f/'() issue:
1) Is guile really still planning to be an emacs engine that can
handle guile and elisp code simultaneously and allow tight
interactions between the two? To know this we need to know if
that's something the primary emacs developers are even interested
in these days.
2) If the answer to (1) is yes, then what is really involved in
supporting elisp, above and beyond the #f/'() issue? Can we
really be that emacs engine without sacrificing other things we
care about? For example, what effect will accomodating elisp's
different language semantics have on potential performance
improvements like agressive compilation.
3) If the answer to (2) is yes, then do we *have* to make '() and #f
equivalent fairly deeply inside guile in order to have tight
elisp/guile code interoperability, or to put it another way, is
there no clever way to get around the problem and still allow
strict Scheme code to cooperate closely with elisp code?
Answering some of these questions may really require some good old
fashioned research. For example, it doesn't really matter whether or
not we think we want to be the emacs lisp engine if the main emacs
developers aren't really interested. While we *could* go under the
"build it and they will come" model. There's a reasonable chance that
such an effort could be wasted, and I'm not interested in trying to
push guile on uninterested parties. There's too much else to do that
people really want.
In summary, unless the answer to all of the above is a clear "yes",
then I'm not particularly interested in worrying about #f/'()
equivalency.
FWIW
--
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org, @linuxdevel.com, and @debian.org
Previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG=1C58 8B2C FB5E 3F64 EA5C 64AE 78FE E5FE F0CB A0AD
- Re: JACAL, scm, Neil Jerram, 2001/10/01
- Re: JACAL, scm, Tom Lord, 2001/10/01
- Re: JACAL, scm, Rob Browning, 2001/10/02
- Re: JACAL, scm, Tom Lord, 2001/10/02
- Re: JACAL, scm,
Rob Browning <=
- Re: JACAL, scm, Tom Lord, 2001/10/02
- Re: JACAL, scm, Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2001/10/02
- Re: JACAL, scm, Rob Browning, 2001/10/02
- Re: JACAL, scm, Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2001/10/02
- Re: JACAL, scm, Miroslav Silovic, 2001/10/03
- Re: JACAL, scm, Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2001/10/02
- Re: JACAL, scm, Dirk Herrmann, 2001/10/03
- Re: JACAL, scm, Rob Browning, 2001/10/03
- Re: JACAL, scm, Evan Prodromou, 2001/10/03
- Re: JACAL, scm, Tom Lord, 2001/10/03