Why not Ruby?

Richard Riley rileyrgdev at gmail.com
Thu Jan 1 23:38:43 CET 2009

Tamas K Papp <tkpapp at gmail.com> writes:

> On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 23:28:08 +0100, Richard Riley wrote:
>> posts controversial but always interesting. His ELisp tutorial is far
>> and away better than anything else out there for the programmer moving
>> to Elisp IMO. He backs up his points with reasons and supportive
> Programmers don't "move" to Elisp.  Emacs Lisp is used out of necessity 
> when you want to program Emacs.  No one in his/her right mind would use 
> it in any other context, as far better alternatives exist (eg CL for 
> those who like Lisp).
> Tamas

"move to Elisp" was clearly meant as "moving towards it in order to use
it". In this case to modify emacs. And to suggest that jobs of work are
not done in Emacs is ridiculous. I am at a loss to really understand
what you mean here in the context.

 important and urgent problems of the technology of today are no longer the satisfactions of the primary needs or of archetypal wishes, but the reparation of the evils and damages by the technology of yesterday.  ~Dennis Gabor, Innovations:  Scientific, Technological and Social, 1970

More information about the Python-list mailing list