3 ms·
CL is really not the answer. In fact, most Lisps probably can't beat Elisp for the simple reason that majority of Lisp dialects are very data-oriented, while El
by iLemming 5d ago
CL is really not the answer. In fact, most Lisps probably can't beat Elisp for the simple reason that majority of Lisp dialects are very data-oriented, while Elisp is specifically text-oriented and that's not the property of the language but the runtime - implicit current buffer, an implicit point, global match data, etc. You can't simply replace forty years of packages, where every single one of them assumes the exact Emacs runtime. Lem's problem (or any Emacs alternative) is that it has to be much better to justify migration, and nothing is much better than Emacs at being Emacs.