4 ms·
It is not an idea that is supported by the whole Emacs community. It is an idea that is supported by the Guile community and RMS. Work has been done to make G
by rekado 8y ago
It is not an idea that is supported by the whole Emacs community. It is an idea that is supported by the Guile community and RMS. Work has been done to make Guile Emacs work, but it is still slow (as it doesn't seem to compile elisp before running it) and somewhat experimental.
It really just needs someone to make it work more reliably and then demonstrate that it is a desirable thing not just in theory but in practise. Nothing short of doing the work would be sufficient to convince the most active Emacs developers.
The person who had been doing most of the work on Guile Emacs isn't currently making progress on this end, so other interested people are welcome to participate in the effort.
(I'm a Guiler and Emacs user and strongly support the idea of letting Emacs sit on top of the Elisp implementation in Guile.)
- AlexeyBrin 8y ago> It is not an idea that is supported by the whole Emacs community. One problem is portability, Emacs Guile means alienating Windows users. Guile does not run on Windows. As it is now, I can use same Emacs on my home Mac system, on my work Windows 10 computer and on various Linux servers.
- rekado 8y ago> Guile does not run on Windows This hasn't always been this way, though, as far as I know. It is also not an insurmountable obstacle, but it is one of many small things that make Emacs developers worry. Another problem that makes Guile Emacs somewhat less attractive is the difference in string handling. Emacs deals well with improperly encoded strings (because that's what people throw at it), whereas Guile prefers to either deal with byte streams or properly encoded strings. Shuffling strings back and forth between an Elisp and a native Guile representation is not very attractive.