4 ms·

Meh. As a long time Emacs user, the only way I'd even consider switching off of GNU Emacs would be if there was a port written in Common Lisp that replaced ELi

Meh. As a long time Emacs user, the only way I'd even consider switching off of GNU Emacs would be if there was a port written in Common Lisp that replaced ELisp with Common Lisp. Even then, I'd only switch if it had replacements for the ELisp modules I use (ERC, Slime, C++-mode, etc.). As an end user, I don't see any advantages in switching to yet another Emacs rewrite in yet another low level language.

Ar-Curunir 10y ago
Isn't the point of this port to work out-of-the-box with existing elisp?
- jswny 10y ago
  Yes but the commenter that you replied to was indicating that he would only care if a rewrite was done in Common Lisp so that Common Lisp could replace ELisp.
  - petecox 10y ago
    I thought the plan was to port emacs lisp to the Guile interpreter and, in the process, make Scheme a first-class citizen for scripting. https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/GuileEmacs https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/GuileEmacs
    - na85 10y ago
      Doesn't guile have atrocious performance, even compared to elisp?
      - anthk 10y ago
        Au contraire. Guile avoids the locks currently Emacs has.
      - omaranto 10y ago
        Maybe it used to, but Guile 2.0 is quite a bit faster than Emacs Lisp. Guile 2.2 is faster still.
- jlarocco 10y ago
  Right. But as an end user there's no advantage to using Remacs over normal GNU Emacs. "Written in Rust instead of C" isn't a useful feature to me. Using Common Lisp instead of ELisp would be useful enough that I might switch.
  - vvanders 10y ago
    Have you tried to build GNU Emacs on windows? I'd take a Rust port in a heartbeat.
    - jlarocco 10y ago
      No. Sounds like a Windows problem. I wrote this Common Lisp script to pull the tip of the official Git repo, and then build and install. I run it every few months if I need to restart Emacs for some reason. Works (for me) on Linux and OSX without out a problem. I've been using it long enough that I had to update it to use Git instead of whatever they used before, and I don't recall ever having a build error once I installed the dependencies the first time. https://gist.github.com/jl2/a6420f0355c5a453b130109df202805f https://gist.github.com/jl2/a6420f0355c5a453b130109df202805f
      - vvanders 10y ago
        I know it's cool to hate on Windows but some of us have to work with operating systems that support the tools we use. Rust has phenomenal cross-platform support so there's no need for scripts or multiple dependencies. It's just a simple "cargo install <foo>" and away you go.
        jlarocco 10y ago
        Well that's kind of silly. Unless you're contributing code to the Windows port of Emacs itself then there's no reason I can think of to build from source instead of downloading the prebuilt Windows binary from the GNU ftp site. They have pre-built 32 and 64 bit versions, each with a variety of options http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/windows/ http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/windows/ Even if that's not feasible for some reason, setting up the build environment is a one time sunk cost, so who cares? I build from source at work because I'm still using an ancient version of Ubuntu there, and "apt-get install emacs" installs version 24.something. At home on a modern Debian system I use "apt-get install emacs" and it works just fine. I did test that build script on OSX, but the one I actually use is from https://emacsformacosx.com/ https://emacsformacosx.com/
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
rcfox 10y ago
Weren't they working on adding the ability to use Guile beside ELisp?

Ar-Curunir 10y ago

Isn't the point of this port to work out-of-the-box with existing elisp?

jswny 10y ago
Yes but the commenter that you replied to was indicating that he would only care if a rewrite was done in Common Lisp so that Common Lisp could replace ELisp.
- petecox 10y ago
  I thought the plan was to port emacs lisp to the Guile interpreter and, in the process, make Scheme a first-class citizen for scripting. https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/GuileEmacs https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/GuileEmacs
  - na85 10y ago
    Doesn't guile have atrocious performance, even compared to elisp?
    - anthk 10y ago
      Au contraire. Guile avoids the locks currently Emacs has.
    - omaranto 10y ago
      Maybe it used to, but Guile 2.0 is quite a bit faster than Emacs Lisp. Guile 2.2 is faster still.
jlarocco 10y ago
Right. But as an end user there's no advantage to using Remacs over normal GNU Emacs. "Written in Rust instead of C" isn't a useful feature to me. Using Common Lisp instead of ELisp would be useful enough that I might switch.
- vvanders 10y ago
  Have you tried to build GNU Emacs on windows? I'd take a Rust port in a heartbeat.
  - jlarocco 10y ago
    No. Sounds like a Windows problem. I wrote this Common Lisp script to pull the tip of the official Git repo, and then build and install. I run it every few months if I need to restart Emacs for some reason. Works (for me) on Linux and OSX without out a problem. I've been using it long enough that I had to update it to use Git instead of whatever they used before, and I don't recall ever having a build error once I installed the dependencies the first time. https://gist.github.com/jl2/a6420f0355c5a453b130109df202805f https://gist.github.com/jl2/a6420f0355c5a453b130109df202805f
    - vvanders 10y ago
      I know it's cool to hate on Windows but some of us have to work with operating systems that support the tools we use. Rust has phenomenal cross-platform support so there's no need for scripts or multiple dependencies. It's just a simple "cargo install <foo>" and away you go.
      - jlarocco 10y ago
        Well that's kind of silly. Unless you're contributing code to the Windows port of Emacs itself then there's no reason I can think of to build from source instead of downloading the prebuilt Windows binary from the GNU ftp site. They have pre-built 32 and 64 bit versions, each with a variety of options http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/windows/ http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/windows/ Even if that's not feasible for some reason, setting up the build environment is a one time sunk cost, so who cares? I build from source at work because I'm still using an ancient version of Ubuntu there, and "apt-get install emacs" installs version 24.something. At home on a modern Debian system I use "apt-get install emacs" and it works just fine. I did test that build script on OSX, but the one I actually use is from https://emacsformacosx.com/ https://emacsformacosx.com/

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

rcfox 10y ago

Weren't they working on adding the ability to use Guile beside ELisp?