>>>> "mb" == Martin Buchholz
<martin(a)xemacs.org> writes:
mb> I don't think Mule and non-Mule xemacs are _so_ intrinsically
mb> different. For example, it might very well be possible to
mb> teach non-mule xemacs how to byte-compile mule elc's, or at
mb> least to recognize when it cannot do so.
The problem is not byte-compiling. The problem is the Lisp reader.
You need to teach the Lisp reader that the construct ?\033$BC8\033(B
is not an error, and decide what behavior in that case would be useful
for a no-mule XEmacs. Otherwise "make World" will blow up in a
package tree with unmarked Mule libraries in it. It's even worse if
we go to UTF-8 as the encoding for Mule files, since the Lisp reader
now has to guess whether ?\302\040 is an error or something it can
actually handle. And how about (string-to-char "\302\040")?
It's _much_ easier to make Mule fast, robust, and universal, IMHO.
Not to mention more useful.
--
University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091
_________________ _________________ _________________ _________________
What are those straight lines for? "XEmacs rules."