3 ms·

In fact it was Guile Emacs exactly. What that entailed was both the ability of the Guile VM to run eLisp so that all existing eLisp packages would run on the G

In fact it was Guile Emacs exactly. What that entailed was both the ability of the Guile VM to run eLisp so that all existing eLisp packages would run on the Guile VM without modification and that Emacs users could write in Guile (or any other language that the Guile VM supported) instead of eLisp if they chose. The big selling point was that no eLisp packages would have to be rewritten in Guile, but that wouldn't stop new packages and other code to be written in Guile if users chose. Both of these were essential for users like myself who actually prefer to write their own code in Scheme, but realize that rewriting all existing packages in it is an unrealistic goal.

gpderetta 5y ago
That's interesting and I guess it would have worked. Unfortunately the reality is that nobody assign people to tasks in purely community driven open source projects like emacs. People do the task they are interested in. At this point I guess it is more likely for elisp to slowly mutate into CL than emacs getting scheme support. I know very little of the lisp ecosystem (I barely can write some elisp) so I don't know what are the pros and cons of scheme vs CL.