Re: XEmacs, Emacs and elisp
Hi,
>> "Helmut" == Helmut Geyer <Helmut.Geyer@IWR.Uni-Heidelberg.De>
>> "Milan" == ilan Zamazal <pdm@blackbird.ics.muni.cz>
[A good discussion of the problems with supporting multiple Emacsen
on the same box partly elided]
The differences between XEmacs and Emacs are deep rooted (both
technically and philosophically); note the vector based event types
in Xemacs vs for more, umm, variety in Emacs. It is unlikely that
these dialects are going to converge any time soon, in fact, on the
xemacs developers list there was mention of the fact that there is no
guarantee of compatibility in the future.
I don't like the solution of using a shell script (though it does
gather all the hacks and checks in one place), for this is at best a
short term solution, and a lot of the Makefiles out there are
beginning to use the EMACS shell/make ariable, and this may well be a
de facto standard.
The very solution of just using XEmacs is not really very good
(though XEmacs devotees would not mind ;-) because, firstly, it
degrades the performance of Emacs, and secondly, may well stop
working in the future.
Installation time compilation, as Milan Noted, is slow and
possibly fragile.
I think I lean towards a total separation of both emacsen,
with two packages for each add-on, one package catering to the needs
of each variant.
vm-emacs
vm-xemacs
tm-emacs
tm-xemacs
and so on, as being the only solution technically feasible in
the long run. It is cleaner, and the only con is disk space usage
(which maybe be the lesser evil compared to what we may face as the
elisp dialects continue to evolve apart).
manoj
--
People who take cat naps don't usually sleep in a cat's
cradle. --anonymous
Manoj Srivastava <url:mailto:srivasta@acm.org>
Mobile, Alabama USA <url:http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com
Reply to: