>>>> "Andy" == Andy Piper
Andy> My $0.02 based on almost zero understanding ;)
Andy> I am assuming that Michael is talking about replacing the underlying
Andy> execution engine so that we would benefit from basically increased
Andy> performance with the existing elisp remaining largely unchanged?
The emphasis is slightly different: I want to keep full Elisp support,
while introducing an additional substrate meant to slowly replace
Elisp. Preferrably, Elisp will simply run inside the substrate.
Andy> My impression is that a scheme engine would be smaller and
Andy> faster than a clisp engine.
Smaller, definitely. Faster is a matter of implementation technology,
and pretty independent of that choice. CLISP as well as most existing
Scheme engines are plenty fast for our purposes. There are
native-code implementations for Scheme and CLISP which are plenty
Andy> Whatever the case I think the replacement should be as small and as fast as
Andy> possible rather than as feature rich as possible.
Cheers =8-} Chipsy
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla