Re: Emacs Lisp and Guile

[Sam Steingold]

RMS = Richard Stallman <address@hidden>
LMI = Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <address@hidden>

RMS> I am not interested in hosting Emacs on Common Lisp

LMI> I, for one, would be quite interested in working on a CL Emacs, if
LMI> there was any hope of there being a chance of it succeeding.

I would rather not create yet another Emacs fork.
If you (we?) can convince either XEmacs people or RMS that Common Lisp
is the way to go, I will contribute.

RMS> because that would require adding far too much to it.

Actually, this is a red herring: the amount to be added to Emacs is
minuscule compared to what is already there, and Emacs will not grow
noticeably because of that.

I am pretty sure that Guile+"3 widely used Scheme object systems" is
larger than Common Lisp.

-- 
Sam Steingold (http://www.podval.org/~sds) running RedHat7.3 GNU/Linux
<http://www.camera.org> <http://www.iris.org.il> <http://www.memri.org/>
<http://www.mideasttruth.com/> <http://www.palestine-central.com/links.html>
"Complete Idiots Guide to Running LINUX Unleashed in a Nutshell for Dummies"