Re: Lisp, siod and LyX
Uwe Brauer <oub(a)eucmos.sim.ucm.es> writes:
1. LyX is written in C++ (I don't know any details) and now the
maintainer is looking for an extension language available as a
library! The decision is not made yet but Siod another lisp
dialect is considered very seriously.
Emacs Lisp is a very ancient Lisp dialect, you will not get any of the
people working seriosly with either emacsen to suggest that for new
projects. I know less of siod, but from what I hear it is a too
minimal Scheme implementation. I'd suggest to stay away from that as
well.
Instead I'd suggest Guile, it is a serious Scheme implementation, with
a lot of hype (and maybe even some support) behind it. There are also
other good Scheme implementations, and other good extension languages.
2. I am interested in this because the second step of LyX concerns
internationalisation beyond iso-8859-1. So if xemacs-lisp would be a
candidate for the LyX team, Mule could be chosen for the purpose of
internationalisation.
MULE is another piece of legacy technology, which -- while useful --
it is very doubtful would be chosen as a base for internationalization
if we should start all over today. Use some form for
Unicode/ISO�10646 based solution instead. I believe all the serious
extension languages have implemented -- or are in the process of
implementing -- i18n support based on that.
I'm not speaking on behalf of anybode, in particular not the XEmacs
team, but I don't think any of the above is controversial.