bonifartius 𒂼𒄄
which lisp to learn?
@scathach i also habe entertained the idea of just building stuff in emacs. would be a good way to make it easier to actually use it?
@bonifartius @scathach Last but not least, when you write for Emacs, you contribute to GNU.
Follow
@akater @scathach
i did some stuff with Tcl and i quite like it, so i'm kind of familiar with the idea of changing internals and metaprogramming. i don't really have the plan for something specific to write in lisp, i only like to learn new languages from time to time. that's why i had the idea of trying stuff with elisp - i might actually have a use for it then :)
@scathach @bonifartius I listed some reasons why it's a good platform. Hope for a CL Emacs is old; why would it suddenly appear in the next decade and not before? I would love to use it, esp. with a GPL CL compiler (and it won't be a replacement without one).
Compiler is *the* difference. In terms of language features, Elisp is very similar to CL right now. No conditions, no packages (namespaces), CLOS is incomplete, no streams, no reader macros, no global symbol macros, no multiple values, missing some number and char types — but that's it. Nothing that couldn't be added eventually.
Compiler is *the* difference. In terms of language features, Elisp is very similar to CL right now. No conditions, no packages (namespaces), CLOS is incomplete, no streams, no reader macros, no global symbol macros, no multiple values, missing some number and char types — but that's it. Nothing that couldn't be added eventually.
Because of its age and overwhelming tech dept Emacs makes for a pretty poor application platform and will hopefully be deprecated sometime in the next decade in favour of a replacement written from the ground up in CL