Re: Emacs with Guile

[Mikael Djurfeldt <mdj at mdj dot nada dot kth dot se>]

Friedrich Dominicus <Friedrich.Dominicus@inka.de> writes:

> Guile seems to be a fast moving target, features come and go. And it has
> not stabilized yet.

While this is true in a strict sense, it isn't a big problem in
practise.  I'm myself maintaining a few applications using Guile, and
most of them have worked for years without changes.

When we make changes, we try to be backward compatible.

[...]

> I'm in now way against Guile, just it seemed that Guile and other
> Schemes are inventing what was in Common Lisp before. Why do you think
> that is necessary? 
> 
> Ok I can imagine some points, like better information hiding etc. but a
> lot of discussion seems to me as if all things should be re-developed. I
> just wonder why?
> 
> I guess this has been discussed before so pointers may be still around.

Recently, there was a discussion on comp.lang.scheme about the
relative merits of Scheme and CL.  Please discuss this matter there or
in the Common LISP group.

It has already been decided that Emacs will convert to Scheme and that
it will use Guile, so this is no longer a useful discussion.