Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Extension language

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lord <address@hidden> writes:

    >> From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden>

    >> I want XEmacs to have Lisp bindings to arch internal functions
    >> so that I don't have to change my parser every time somebody
    >> fixes a typo or lack of clarity in a message or makes things
    >> more terse, and change my wrapper function when somebody gets
    >> rid of a tla option or ....

    Tom> I'm really not so sure that's what you really want.

You're right, it's not.  It's just the closest thing that I'm likely
to get to what I really want, which is a well-specified RPC (XMLRPC
would do ;-) interface.  I'd be very pleased if that could be done
with a pipe to an asynchronous process (could be process per command,
as with the CLI).

As for the defects you describe in an arch linked to XEmacs, I use
Gnus.  Obviously I do not care about safety in long-lived processes or
even C-g interruptibility![1]

    Tom> I think you want a stable CLI

No, I do not want a stable CLI for this purpose.  The CLI can be a
superset of the RPC API if that is convenient for implementation of
the CLI, but they must be specified separately.



Footnotes: 
[1]  Of course these are exposing (X)Emacs bugs, not bugs in Gnus,
which is simply exercising the API as violently as possible.

-- 
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences     http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba                    Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
               Ask not how you can "do" free software business;
              ask what your business can "do for" free software.