3 ms·
Honestly, based on my minimal experience fooling with Zmacs on my Lisp Machines, a non-GNU emacs with Common Lisp underneath is likely to be much better, especi
by eschaton 7y ago
Honestly, based on my minimal experience fooling with Zmacs on my Lisp Machines, a non-GNU emacs with Common Lisp underneath is likely to be much better, especially if it can use a general purpose command system like CLIM’s.
- lispm 7y agoAlso if one looks at MCL's Fred (-> Fred resembles Emacs deliberately), that was nicely programmable and also possible to use as dialog items in GUIs. For CL applications I vastly prefer such a flexible model (object-oriented architecture, editor windows with an optimized Emacs-like command set, reuse as components in GUIs, ...), instead of a large monolithic editor, which then needs to be used as an external program...