Project moves Vim towards Emacs [CROSSPOSTED]
Simon Richard Clarkstone
http://wiki.alu.org/Vim_ECL
"Vim linked with Embeddable Common Lisp (ECL)"
Does this mean that vim is turning into Emacs? Is this the result of an
infiltration attempt by the church of Emacs? Or is it merely an April
Fool's Day Joke that fell through a time-warp? ( ;-) to all 3, BTW)
--
Simon Richard Clarkstone: s.r.cl?rkst?n?@durham.ac.uk/s?m?n.cl?rkst?n?@
hotmail.com ### "I have a spelling chequer / it came with my PC /
it plainly marks for my revue / Mistake's I cannot sea" ...
by: John Brophy (at: http://www.cfwf.ca/farmj/fjjun96/)
Burton Samograd
> I haven't seen this posted in either of these groups yet, so here goes...
>
> http://wiki.alu.org/Vim_ECL
> "Vim linked with Embeddable Common Lisp (ECL)"
>
> Does this mean that vim is turning into Emacs? Is this the result of
> an infiltration attempt by the church of Emacs? Or is it merely an
> April Fool's Day Joke that fell through a time-warp? ( ;-) to all 3,
> BTW)
The new version of Vim just came out, but I haven't heard anythin
about this. I don't see it as a problem; Vim is a good editor (oops,
maybe not in this news group) and adding lisp to it could make it even
better (as in closer to emacs). But bolting something like a
programming language after the fact would surely not be as good of a
solution as designing the whole program around it's implimentation
lanaguage. It might be good project, but I would say that it would
take quite some time to reach close to what emacs has.
--
burton samograd kruhft .at. gmail
kruhft.blogspot.com www.myspace.com/kruhft metashell.blogspot.com
Per Abrahamsen
of them is holier by association than others doesn't change anything
fundamental. It will just be even more of a mess, moving further away
from the practical purity of a single embedded language.
The concept of vile was a lot more sacrilegious than what we see now.