Re: Nano-improvements

[Dmitry Antipov]

On 07/03/2014 06:53 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> I didn't say "we don't need nano-improvements".  I said they should
> take a backseat to more substantial improvements in functionality,
> especially user-visible functionality.

IMO all of this friction just comes from the different views on what
Emacs is. If this is just an editor, you're absolutely correct. But if
someone treats it as a unique Lisp runtime system which can do a lot of
interesting things beyond evaluating s-expressions, an opposite
conclusions are much more likely. For example, what is more important -
a) ability to edit huge files without loading all data into memory or
b) JIT compiler from byte code to native code? If we're developing
just an editor, a) is much more important, at least to match the
proprietary competitors like SlickEdit; but if we're developing the
language for the specific problem domain (and want to extend this
domain as our language becomes more and more faster), b) can be a step
to a lot of impressive opportunities.

Dmitry