Post At6eCHiiACggWTCP6u by hajovonta@mastodon.online
(DIR) More posts by hajovonta@mastodon.online
(DIR) Post #At6eBNacr4wgRAz9jU by mark@mastodon.fixermark.com
2025-04-14T20:55:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@glitzersachen @screwtape In my case? Actually yes. ;)I mean, I do suspend it from time-to-time. But broadly speaking, I have three emacs instances I care about on the daily:An instance on my corporate laptop (stays up all the time, preserves state when the laptop sleeps)An instance on the headless developer machine I remote into (stays up all the time, only reboots when that machine reboots, which is "When IT forces me to, they can take my developer session from my cold, dead hands...")An instance on my personal hack-about laptop, which I suspend when I'm not using but otherwise stays up perpetually until the laptop takes a full restart, which is when I'm forced to (see (2)).
(DIR) Post #At6eBOeusbyJkm063k by screwtape@mastodon.sdf.org
2025-04-14T22:14:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@glitzersachen I do agree that it is a regret that the high level implementation language of the lisp editor, emacs modernly is and has been C rather than lisp.@mark you should tag this toot #emacs for more people to enjoy
(DIR) Post #At6eBPVjiEDsOaiHOC by screwtape@mastodon.sdf.org
2025-04-14T22:52:05Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@glitzersachen the problem is I guess the extreme dominance of emacs from 1990 until now (viz Pike's complaint in Systems Research Is Irrelevant) and we can't just /tell/ people to switch to a common lisp emacs implementation.However, now I got my CAISOR paradigm software individuals timewarped to present, remind me to ask Kent to give us (me) more of a push in making a ZWEI port spiritually similar to Kent's code-reuseability research in the early 90s.@mark
(DIR) Post #At6eBQ7JSWHSH8IHxY by hajovonta@mastodon.online
2025-04-15T05:27:50Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@screwtape As I see it, the "problem" is the ecosystem, which is tied to Emacs Lisp. This is the greatest power of #Emacs because there are existing Emacs clones with CL and Scheme already, but those are not compatible with existing packages, and rewriting the whole ecosystem is a huge, impossible work.So any successor would need to be able to run both Emacs Lisp and the other one.And there can be other obstacles too, like licensing problems.@glitzersachen @mark
(DIR) Post #At6eCGKZKTmWDItbqC by dougmerritt@mathstodon.xyz
2025-04-14T22:28:40Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@screwtape @glitzersachen @mark Keyword arguments are great!I've done so many zillions of lines of C for systems programming that it's hard for me to see it as undesirable in that capacity, even if there is in fact a better alternative.What one is accustomed to typically feels natural and right, just from the habits and experience, not from careful judgements.Anyways...how easy is it to compile Common Lisp into something nicely efficient, so that it's not unnatural to use it as a systems programming language?
(DIR) Post #At6eCHBOA624r7bnAe by oantolin@mathstodon.xyz
2025-04-15T04:24:41Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@dougmerritt @screwtape @glitzersachen @mark I don't think it's that easy to compile Common Lisp, but that hasn't stopped people from writing great native code compilers like SBCL.
(DIR) Post #At6eCHiiACggWTCP6u by hajovonta@mastodon.online
2025-04-15T05:20:52Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@oantolin In fact, Common Lisp compiled with SBCL is already efficient, comparable to C and Rust.And regarding Emacs, the primary goal is not efficiency, but using Lisp everywhere instead.@dougmerritt @screwtape @glitzersachen @mark
(DIR) Post #At6eCICUNUVU0p8BWa by oantolin@mathstodon.xyz
2025-04-15T05:45:43Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@hajovonta I agree. Thanks to SBCL, Common Lisp is my go to language when I need raw speed (life seems too short to write in low level languages).@dougmerritt @screwtape @glitzersachen @mark
(DIR) Post #AtAH3Le3GWE8JC527E by mark@mastodon.fixermark.com
2025-04-14T00:34:06Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@glitzersachen I think I see what you mean.I came to LISP as a whole from emacs and haven't had occasion to use "real LISP" (by which I mean probably "Common LISP compiled with CMUCL or SBCL") on any project beyond a hobby ALICE implementation, so I think I don't really ever notice because ELisp covers all my use cases. But I imagine for someone familiar with Common LISP, it'd chafe.Apparently, Hemlock is an emacs-like written in CMUCL, but that's of course not really what we want here because it bifurcates the universe of extensions and packages.
(DIR) Post #AtAH3NC7VL4Z791krA by screwtape@mastodon.sdf.org
2025-04-14T01:07:17Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mark the key fallout there is that emacs lisp's cl-loop does not support the (correct) keyword syntax for loop, and that non-keyword symbols are included in ansi common lisp.In my opinion, an editor warrants its own domain specific lisp, like other grand lisp programs. It is a shame that its host language is C rather than lisp for historical reasons. Lisp is a famously high level implementation language, after all.@glitzersachen
(DIR) Post #AtAH3NxGg2mpTN5PLU by akater@shitposter.world
2025-04-17T00:06:27.125804Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@screwtapeWhat would be the downside of *not* having its own “domain specific lisp”? And what are those other grand lisp programs?@mark