GNU A Possible Ally?
Tue, 6 May 1997 22:15:11 -0500 (CDT)
> >GNU seems to have a vested interest in propagating Lisp as well.
> >As a matter of fact, right off the bat I find the following:
> > 1) One of the goals of GNU is to develop "a Lisp-based window
> > system through which several Lisp programs and ordinary
> > Unix programs can share a screen", in addition to having
> > Lisp (along with C) as a system programming language (is
> > Guile the culmination of that effort?).
> At one time, many, many moons ago, FSF was talking about writing an
> X type of windowing system in lisp. Nothing every came of it as far as
> I know. This might be refering to it. I don't think Guile is this
I'm sorry, I was too vague -- I meant to ask if Guile was
the culmination of the effort of having Lisp as a system
programming language rather than a Lisp-based windowing utility.
> > 2) Emacs (originally written by Stallman, the author of the
> > GNU manifesto which states the above goal), is largely
> > written in Lisp and uses Lisp as its extension language.
> We should steal as much of this code as makes sense. We'll have some
> problems similar to what the Guile people encountered. (Dynamic
> scoping be one.) We may be able to steal ideas from them too.
I pray to God that we can kill dynamic scoping off quickly. I'm
all for using pre-existing code, although the term "steal" doesn't
sit well with me :)
> > 3) A portable Common Lisp implementation (already done right? GCL?)
> GCL is Lisp for C hackers! It sucks big time! (AKCL wasn't bad in
> it's day.) This is a classic example of where the insistance on the
> GNU license virus caused the FSF to shot themselves in the head. CMUCL
> would have been a better basis but it got a doing anything you want
> but don't blame us license on it. GCL is not a viable option for this
Well I didn't mean to imply that we should build on top of GCL,
on the contrary I was under the impression that the consensus was
that CMU-CL should be our foundation. I was just using this as
an example of GNU possibly being on our side by having a vested
interest in Lisp.
> >[There may be more]
> >All opinions are welcome.
> I'm in favor of stealing code that meets our needs from where ever
> we can. Better yet is stealing ideas. But if something doesn't match,
> let's not tie ourselves down.
Agreed. This is a substantial enough undertaking without having to
write everything from scratch. Mix and match sounds great.
> Mike McDonald
Out of interest, would anyone have any objections if I were to
try to pass word around of what we're doing to GNU? I'm not sure
what there would be to gain if anything, but maybe if they know about
us... well who knows -- could it hurt?
I won't do anything for a few days just to see if there are any
objections, and if not then I'll go about trying to contact
whoever I can.
I'm not saying that I'd be acting as a representative of this
group in any fashion, or even implying cooperation with them, but
at least seeing if there's interest, if there's possible support,
if there's something to gain.
Walk into the Whitehouse,
Right up to the President's desk,
Underneath my "Dead Boy's" shirt
There's a bomb strapped to my chest
"Blow Them Up" by Bomb Squadron