My $0.02 based on almost zero understanding ;)
I am assuming that Michael is talking about replacing the underlying
execution engine so that we would benefit from basically increased
performance with the existing elisp remaining largely unchanged?
My impression is that a scheme engine would be smaller and faster than a
clisp engine. If this is all true then I don't see what the problem is. The
last thing I would want to see is XEmacs bloated still further with a
heavyweight execution engine.
Whatever the case I think the replacement should be as small and as fast as
possible rather than as feature rich as possible.
andy
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
" .sigs are like your face - rarely seen by you and uglier than you think"
Dr Andy Piper, Technical Architect, Parallax Solutions Ltd
mail: andyp(a)parallax.co.uk web:
www.parallax.co.uk/~andyp