4 ms·

As of GSoC 2014, I believe Guile Emacs works with only some performance regressions (I believe due to overuse of dynamic scope?). In any case, you can run it to

As of GSoC 2014, I believe Guile Emacs works with only some performance regressions (I believe due to overuse of dynamic scope?). In any case, you can run it today if you wanted to, just follow the process outlined on the wiki [0]. That said, I don't think the Emacs project has fully committed to porting over for various reasons, probably in part because running Guile on some platforms (Windows) is really difficult, and thus would be a problem for users. I'm sure the people in #guile on FreeNode could give a much more detailed answer though, I don't follow the Guile/Emacs thing so closely as I'm mostly a CHICKEN Scheme / Vim user. [0] https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/GuileEmacs https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/GuileEmacs

davexunit 10y ago
If you use GNU Guix, you can install it quite easily: guix package -i guile-emacs
rhabarba 10y ago
It's not the language. I don't really like Scheme (I'm more a Common Lisp guy). I would, however, really love to see Emacs without the Emacs Lisp limitations because everything missing from Emacs - at least to me - is performance. Guile looks like a good way to work around that.
qwertyuiop924 10y ago
Vim? Really? Does vim implement the original vi's lisp mode? I hope it does. The original vi's lisp mode is something I have only seen traditional vi implement thus far, and it's pretty nice.
- ThatGeoGuy 10y ago
  I actually do not know, as I tend to use slimv [0]. There's a lot of buzz lately around geiser [1] for Emacs, and few Scheme implementations provide a workable SLIME interface, but for the most part I get by. I don't miss too much, and don't see why everyone assumes Emacs is the only way to write lispy code (without a full blown IDE like Dr. Racket). Vim + paredit inside of tmux, with a proper REPL in another pane / window is a great workflow. Of course this requires some more plugins to Vim, but for the most part sending commands through tmux is pretty lightweight. [0] https://bitbucket.org/kovisoft/slimv https://bitbucket.org/kovisoft/slimv [1] http://www.nongnu.org/geiser/ http://www.nongnu.org/geiser/
  - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
    Thing is, Emacs beat vim at extensibility, and vim's been playing catchup in that area ever since. Also, geiser is really, really good. When editing lisp in the original vi's Lisp mode, ( and ) operate over sexprs, { and } don't stop at atoms, moving you to the next sexpr, [[ and ]] skip to the next sexpr at top level, and if you set autoindent, your code is indented correctly for lisp. Combined with vi's other operators, this is pretty good, although by no means as good as actual paredit.
amirouche 10y ago
There is a recent thread on the mailing list about the subject https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2016-09/msg00000.html https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2016-09/msg00...
AceJohnny2 10y ago
Also, from a back-of-the-envelope calculation from the ohloh.net numbers, Emacs has ~1.1M LoC of ELisp. With that kind of number, you're pretty much guaranteed some elisp is going to stick around forever (especially considering Emacs' glacial [but improving!] rate of change).
- ThatGeoGuy 10y ago
  This is probably the main misconception: Guile is only included to change the underlying Elisp implementation, not to completely change everything from Elisp to Scheme. The problem is mostly getting maintainers to switch over (as most are old enough to have dabbled in the current Elisp engine at least a few times, if not helped write the original implementation). So yeah, it's not so much the Elisp in the Emacs source that's the problem, it's how do the maintainers switch to maintaining Elisp inside of the Guile project (up until now, Elisp was maintained as a language alongside Emacs). At the very least, this is how I understand it.
  - rhabarba 10y ago
    There are large packages like Gnus and TRAMP which are directly developed inside (and distributed with) Emacs, but, in theory, they should "just work" in the Guile version even after XEmacs support was dropped, right?
- fafner 10y ago
  And that does not include any external packets... Yes, there is no way Emacs will get rid of elisp. That's why Guile Emacs includes writing an elisp frontend for Guile. (There is also a Frontend for ECMAScript and an experimental one for Lua)

davexunit 10y ago

If you use GNU Guix, you can install it quite easily: guix package -i guile-emacs

rhabarba 10y ago

It's not the language. I don't really like Scheme (I'm more a Common Lisp guy). I would, however, really love to see Emacs without the Emacs Lisp limitations because everything missing from Emacs - at least to me - is performance. Guile looks like a good way to work around that.

qwertyuiop924 10y ago

Vim? Really? Does vim implement the original vi's lisp mode? I hope it does. The original vi's lisp mode is something I have only seen traditional vi implement thus far, and it's pretty nice.

ThatGeoGuy 10y ago
I actually do not know, as I tend to use slimv [0]. There's a lot of buzz lately around geiser [1] for Emacs, and few Scheme implementations provide a workable SLIME interface, but for the most part I get by. I don't miss too much, and don't see why everyone assumes Emacs is the only way to write lispy code (without a full blown IDE like Dr. Racket). Vim + paredit inside of tmux, with a proper REPL in another pane / window is a great workflow. Of course this requires some more plugins to Vim, but for the most part sending commands through tmux is pretty lightweight. [0] https://bitbucket.org/kovisoft/slimv https://bitbucket.org/kovisoft/slimv [1] http://www.nongnu.org/geiser/ http://www.nongnu.org/geiser/
- qwertyuiop924 10y ago
  Thing is, Emacs beat vim at extensibility, and vim's been playing catchup in that area ever since. Also, geiser is really, really good. When editing lisp in the original vi's Lisp mode, ( and ) operate over sexprs, { and } don't stop at atoms, moving you to the next sexpr, [[ and ]] skip to the next sexpr at top level, and if you set autoindent, your code is indented correctly for lisp. Combined with vi's other operators, this is pretty good, although by no means as good as actual paredit.

amirouche 10y ago

There is a recent thread on the mailing list about the subject https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2016-09/msg00000.html https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2016-09/msg00...

AceJohnny2 10y ago

Also, from a back-of-the-envelope calculation from the ohloh.net numbers, Emacs has ~1.1M LoC of ELisp. With that kind of number, you're pretty much guaranteed some elisp is going to stick around forever (especially considering Emacs' glacial [but improving!] rate of change).

ThatGeoGuy 10y ago
This is probably the main misconception: Guile is only included to change the underlying Elisp implementation, not to completely change everything from Elisp to Scheme. The problem is mostly getting maintainers to switch over (as most are old enough to have dabbled in the current Elisp engine at least a few times, if not helped write the original implementation). So yeah, it's not so much the Elisp in the Emacs source that's the problem, it's how do the maintainers switch to maintaining Elisp inside of the Guile project (up until now, Elisp was maintained as a language alongside Emacs). At the very least, this is how I understand it.
- rhabarba 10y ago
  There are large packages like Gnus and TRAMP which are directly developed inside (and distributed with) Emacs, but, in theory, they should "just work" in the Guile version even after XEmacs support was dropped, right?
fafner 10y ago
And that does not include any external packets... Yes, there is no way Emacs will get rid of elisp. That's why Guile Emacs includes writing an elisp frontend for Guile. (There is also a Frontend for ECMAScript and an experimental one for Lua)