Goism – Use Go instead of Emacs Lisp inside Emacs • Hacker News Board

Goism – Use Go instead of Emacs Lisp inside Emacs

#1

Post by demiol » Sun, Jun 18, 2017, 4:00 PM UTC

Goism – Use Go instead of Emacs Lisp inside Emacs
github.com

Re: Goism – Use Go instead of Emacs Lisp inside Emacs

#2

Post by josteink » Sun, Jun 18, 2017, 6:31 PM UTC

I agree Emacs Lisp is pretty inferior as far as lisps go, but IMO this seems pretty misguided.

Technically impressive, I'm sure, but will it be around for another 30 years?

If someone writes a module using this, will I be able to rely on that module keeping on working for the years to come?

Re: Goism – Use Go instead of Emacs Lisp inside Emacs

#3

Post by fithisux » Sun, Jun 18, 2017, 6:38 PM UTC

Congratulations, keep up the good work.

Re: Goism – Use Go instead of Emacs Lisp inside Emacs

#4

Post by bigdubs » Sun, Jun 18, 2017, 6:39 PM UTC

josteink wrote: post #2

I agree Emacs Lisp is pretty inferior as far as lisps go, but IMO this seems pretty misguided. Technically impressive, I'm sure, but will it be around for another 30 years? If someone writes a module using this, will I be able to rely on that module keeping on working for the years to come?

Why wouldn't that be the case? The golang authors have been pretty strong on backwards compatibility so far (even though it is admittedly a young language).

Re: Goism – Use Go instead of Emacs Lisp inside Emacs

#5

Post by jlarocco » Sun, Jun 18, 2017, 6:40 PM UTC

Another case where it'd be nice to have a "Why are we doing this?" section in the README.

If it's just a demo then it's neat. Interesting that it can be done.

On the other hand, if it's a real push to get people scripting Emacs with Go, then I don't see the point at all. It's solving a problem people don't really have.

Re: Goism – Use Go instead of Emacs Lisp inside Emacs

#6

Post by hk__2 » Sun, Jun 18, 2017, 6:42 PM UTC

jlarocco wrote: post #5

Another case where it'd be nice to have a "Why are we doing this?" section in the README. If it's just a demo then it's neat. Interesting that it can be done. On the other hand, if it's a real push to get people scripting Emacs with Go, then I don't see the point at all. It's solving a problem people don't really have.

> It's solving a problem people don't really have.

Isn’t "I want to script Emacs but I don’t like LISP" a problem to solve?

Re: Goism – Use Go instead of Emacs Lisp inside Emacs

#7

Post by kornish » Sun, Jun 18, 2017, 6:43 PM UTC

bigdubs wrote: post #4

josteink wrote: post #2

I agree Emacs Lisp is pretty inferior as far as lisps go, but IMO this seems pretty misguided. Technically impressive, I'm sure, but will it be around for another 30 years? If someone writes a module using this, will I be able to rely on that module keeping on working for the years to come?

Why wouldn't that be the case? The golang authors have been pretty strong on backwards compatibility so far (even though it is admittedly a young language).

Is josteink talking about Go or Goism? Probably the latter.

Re: Goism – Use Go instead of Emacs Lisp inside Emacs

#8

Post by ue_ » Sun, Jun 18, 2017, 6:49 PM UTC

hk__2 wrote: post #6

jlarocco wrote: post #5

Another case where it'd be nice to have a "Why are we doing this?" section in the README. If it's just a demo then it's neat. Interesting that it can be done. On the other hand, if it's a real push to get people scripting Emacs with Go, then I don't see the point at all. It's solving a problem people don't really have.

> It's solving a problem people don't really have. Isn’t "I want to script Emacs but I don’t like LISP" a problem to solve?

A better thing to answer would be why people prefer less powerful languages to the more powerful, and what can be done about it? Framed that way,this seems like an XY problem.

Re: Goism – Use Go instead of Emacs Lisp inside Emacs

#9

Post by Tenobrus » Sun, Jun 18, 2017, 6:52 PM UTC

I haven't taken an incredibly close look at this, but it seems like a pretty bad idea. Elisp is definitely not a great language, and I'd like an alternative as much as the next Emacs user. But I feel pretty strongly that any alternative has to be a Lisp, or very close to one. Code-is-data/data-is-code is very important for the more "config-file" aspects of configuring Emacs. Being able to use and write DSLs to succinctly encode exactly how you want aspects of the editor to behave is a critical strength. I've tried systems that were configurable in Python and other good-but-non-Lisp languages, and it's always much more annoying, because the language is (purposefully) limited w.r.t metaprogramming and possible DSLs. That's a good thing when optimizing for maintainability by others and obviousness, but not so much when optimizing for maximum personal customizability.

Go seems like quite possibly the polar opposite of this, as far in the "keep it simple and understandable by literally everyone by cutting out many techniques for metaprograming and code reuse". Which perhaps is the point, but if so it seems like that point misses much of the draw of Emacs?

While this is definitely impressive technically, I think Guile Emacs is a much more plausible option.

Re: Goism – Use Go instead of Emacs Lisp inside Emacs

#10

Post by jlarocco » Sun, Jun 18, 2017, 6:53 PM UTC

hk__2 wrote: post #6

jlarocco wrote: post #5

Another case where it'd be nice to have a "Why are we doing this?" section in the README. If it's just a demo then it's neat. Interesting that it can be done. On the other hand, if it's a real push to get people scripting Emacs with Go, then I don't see the point at all. It's solving a problem people don't really have.

> It's solving a problem people don't really have. Isn’t "I want to script Emacs but I don’t like LISP" a problem to solve?

Are there many (or even any) people in that situation, though?

Who decides they want a script-able editor, but then chooses one scripted in a language they don't like and don't want to learn?