Re: Python Emacs (was Re: The <word>.<word>.<word> rule)

["Eric S. Johansson" <esj@harvee.billerica.ma.us>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "François Pinard" <pinard@iro.umontreal.ca>
To: "Kai Großjohann" <Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE>
Cc: <ding@gnus.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 4:59 PM
Subject: Re: Python Emacs (was Re: The <word>.<word>.<word> rule)


> Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann) writes:
>
> > What's so bad about Lisp that people are requesting a Java Emacs or a
> > Python Emacs or a Perl Emacs?
>
> No Java, no Perl, but Python! :-)
>
> It's just that Python is concise and legible.  Perl and Java don't match.

when people ask for scripting in <their favorite language>, all they are
asking for use for the tool to accommodate their current knowledgebase.
Lisp has an perceived extremely high learning curve.  When people are trying
to solve a problem with a tool, the last thing they want to be told is that
they need to discard what they know and learn a new way of thinking.

When a user is told they need to climb a very large learning curve, the
usual reaction is to put the software on the shelf and do things the brute
force/bloody ignorance way because it is perceived as easier.

A case in point is Gnus.  I'm very impressed at its power but using it to
read IMAP e-mail is sufficiently difficult that I've given up and gone back
to outlook (or pine on heavy virus days).  One of these days when I have a
week to spare, I'll go back to using it as my newsreader.  For now, tin is
sufficiently simple that I can do what I want without needing to spend a lot
of time learning.

As an aside, I stay on the list because I am collecting bits of emacs
knowledge I find very useful and I'm willing to learn slowly if I don't need
it (the knowledge) right now.

> Yesterday, I rewrote in Python a little piece of Emacs LISP code.  Not
only
> it used less vertical space, but it became much clearer.  Always the same
> story, for the few times I did this, so far.  But these were always toys.
> I honestly do not know how it would go for a major piece of code, and how
to
> organise on a large scale a few LISP idioms which do not translate well in
> Python.  But more it goes, more I dare to think that Python might be
usable.

I would love to see emacs integrate python and/or Perl as a first-class
scripting language like lisp with complete access to all of the internals
and primitive functions.  it would be extremely powerful (not to mention
large :-)

--- eric