3 ms·

You are assuming many things that are simply not true. There is no goal or will to integrate Guile in Emacs. It was a failed experiment taken up by volunteers o

You are assuming many things that are simply not true. There is no goal or will to integrate Guile in Emacs. It was a failed experiment taken up by volunteers outside of the core Emacs development team. Most of the value in the Emacs ecosystem lies in Emacs Lisp and not in an "abstracted out" Emacs definition. Plenty of folks have implemented Emacs in various languages (using the same "abstracted out" definition) and guess what, all of them went nowhere. Because they were missing the point, just like you do.

pmoriarty 6y ago
"Plenty of folks have implemented Emacs in various languages (using the same "abstracted out" definition) and guess what, all of them went nowhere." If they were: 1 - Lispy 2 - Faster 3 - Fully compatible with existing eLisp packages. I think people would switch. Guile Emacs is all of those except (at this point) faster.. when I tried it, it was unfortunately way slower. If the speed could be improved a lot and the remaining bugs ironed out, it would be a very strong contender.
- metroholografix 6y ago
  > Guile Emacs is all of those except (at this point) faster. Guile Emacs is not at all compatible with Emacs Lisp, it only implements a tiny subset of Emacs Lisp. It's right there in OP's article. So the only thing it has going for it is being .. Lispy. Not enough.
  - pmoriarty 6y ago
    In my own testing from Nov 2017, I got GUI Emacs to run.. it was slow, but it ran. Vanilla GUI Emacs runs a non-trivial amount of eLisp code, so at least then with the version of Emacs I used (24.4.50) the compatibility situation could not have been dire than what the OP reported. Also, you have to bear in mind that Guile Emacs was the work of one single (very talented) person over a single summer. If there was actually a team of people working on it, I expect a lot more progress towards compatibility could be made. Here is a list of outstanding items that still need to be worked on Guile Emacs: https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/GuileEmacsTodo https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/GuileEmacsTodo
  - bjoli 6y ago
    That is because op didn't run it in Emacs. Guile-emacs uses the same Emacs c functions that Emacs elisp does, and running the Emacs tests against guiles elisp-without Emacs is like taking away a huge part of the standard functionality and expecting things to run. The points it makes about speed are not wrong, but that the author fails to understand even the most basic relations between Guile-emacs and guile-elisp makes it hard for me to take it seriously.

pmoriarty 6y ago

"Plenty of folks have implemented Emacs in various languages (using the same "abstracted out" definition) and guess what, all of them went nowhere." If they were: 1 - Lispy 2 - Faster 3 - Fully compatible with existing eLisp packages. I think people would switch. Guile Emacs is all of those except (at this point) faster.. when I tried it, it was unfortunately way slower. If the speed could be improved a lot and the remaining bugs ironed out, it would be a very strong contender.

metroholografix 6y ago
> Guile Emacs is all of those except (at this point) faster. Guile Emacs is not at all compatible with Emacs Lisp, it only implements a tiny subset of Emacs Lisp. It's right there in OP's article. So the only thing it has going for it is being .. Lispy. Not enough.
- pmoriarty 6y ago
  In my own testing from Nov 2017, I got GUI Emacs to run.. it was slow, but it ran. Vanilla GUI Emacs runs a non-trivial amount of eLisp code, so at least then with the version of Emacs I used (24.4.50) the compatibility situation could not have been dire than what the OP reported. Also, you have to bear in mind that Guile Emacs was the work of one single (very talented) person over a single summer. If there was actually a team of people working on it, I expect a lot more progress towards compatibility could be made. Here is a list of outstanding items that still need to be worked on Guile Emacs: https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/GuileEmacsTodo https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/GuileEmacsTodo
- bjoli 6y ago
  That is because op didn't run it in Emacs. Guile-emacs uses the same Emacs c functions that Emacs elisp does, and running the Emacs tests against guiles elisp-without Emacs is like taking away a huge part of the standard functionality and expecting things to run. The points it makes about speed are not wrong, but that the author fails to understand even the most basic relations between Guile-emacs and guile-elisp makes it hard for me to take it seriously.