Re: Hideshow
Jerry James <james(a)xemacs.org> writes:
Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic(a)xemacs.org> wrote:
> I believe "a little effort" is a way too optimistic assessment. In
> fact, I'd venture to say that it's a losing battle of a different
> kind. Here are the reasons:
I would say that this line of argument logically extends to the
following: we should be building compatibility libraries so that Emacs
programmers can use the XEmacs APIs there, too, rather than the other
way around.
But we already have an implementation of the XEmacs API's, and it's
called "XEmacs". Writing another one, on top of FSF Emacs, sounds
like suicide, all the while suffering from exactly the same technical
problems as the reverse.
I've done it myself in some cases; for example:
http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2002-04/msg00388.html
But imagine trying to port the extents API or the specifier API under
FSF. Not to mention things like toolbar APIs, glyphs, keymaps, etc.