Re: Where do you want to go tomorrow?

And, where is the _urgent_ need for replacing Emacs Lisp with either Scheme or Common Lisp that makes worth the work ? Sure, I would like to have a _real_ Common Lisp as the Lisp to program Emacs in (and that's why I have an eye on Erik Naggum's CL-Emacs project), but I am certainly not convinced that _replacing_ the current engine with anything else really offers any big gains. Say, we would replace the current engine with some (modified) foo-scheme implementation, like say guile, or the gtk-engine. Fine, now we can have some guys that already use that foo-Scheme implement some new bar-functionality. But what is the benefit for the current existing system ? And is it really true that replacing Emacs Lisp with another Lisp will encourage new users ? I doubt it, because, well, hey, here we have another lisp engine, that mainly consists of "Emacs Lisp" (note the quotes), because the _essential_ things for programming Emacs is _not_ the lisp language underneath but the functionality, and this is the real part which makes Emacs Lisp _Emacs_ Lisp (be it that the Lisp language is Elisp, Scheme, CL ...).