XPost: alt.comp.os.windows-10, alt.comp.software.firefox   
   From: janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com   
      
   On 21.01.2025 05:47, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:   
   > On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 09:26:04 +0100, Janis Papanagnou wrote:   
   >   
   >> Note that not all folks like functional programming in general or   
   >> specifically programming in Lisp-like languages.   
   >   
   > ELisp is not a “functional programming” language. And like it or not,   
   Lisp   
   > has always been a cutting-edge language, with features not commonly found   
   > in more conventional languages.   
      
   Oh, I thought it would have something to do with Lisp because of the   
   chosen name. - And Wikipedia seems to support that; "Emacs Lisp is a   
   Lisp dialect made for Emacs."   
      
   (For discussion of programming languages; that's not the appropriate   
   newsgroups. I spare me a comment.)   
      
   >   
   > Consider that one of the Vim family, Neovim, I think it is, has decided   
   > that the traditional Vim extension language isn’t good enough, so it has   
   > adopted Lua as an extension language. At least it’s in the right   
   > direction, but it still doesn’t have the power of Emacs.   
      
   I think it's better to use an existing script language in case any   
   tool wants to support scripting than to invent an own language.   
      
   Concerning Vim you can read it supports: "scripting languages (both   
   native and through alternative scripting interpreters such as Perl,   
   Python, Ruby, Tcl, etc.) including support for plugins". - Sounds   
   extremely flexible and powerful to me. And obviously also provides   
   choices for folks that don't like Elisp (or Lisp, or any scripting   
   language that is unknown to them).   
      
   But I anyway never felt the need to do any scripting [with script   
   languages] in Vim; it has (already natively) an extremely powerful   
   concept and editing feature set.   
      
   >   
   > Where is there an editor to compare with Emacs, with an extension language   
   > that is not Lisp, yet is equally powerful? There isn’t one.   
      
   If the quote above is correct then Vim would clearly be such a   
   candidate. (It sounds even much better than what Emacs does with   
   its own implemented language dialect. - Not that I would care.)   
      
   (And in Vim you might not need Scripting that often as in Emacs?)[*]   
      
   I'm anyway not interested in starting or continuing the Editor War.   
   (And, to be honest, even less so with any "religious" fanatics that   
   we often find in Usenet.)[**]   
      
   Janis   
      
   [*] I recall someone in Usenet - it might even have been you? - showed   
   some Lisp-like code (15-20 lines, or so) for Emacs to support some new   
   function in Emacs. Vim supported that already natively.   
      
   [**] Personally I acknowledge that Emacs is a powerful editor; and it   
   even offers much more beyond editing. Concerning the _editing power_   
   I'd never trade Vim for Emacs, though. YMMV   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)