Le 15 juil. 2010 à 08:28, David Kastrup a écrit : > Well, it does not look like this is going to be a fast thing. > > a) Nicolas has decided against using CEDET/Semantic for the parsing of > Lilypond because of performance reasons. That is a no-go for my > tastes because of being Emacs fanboy: if Semantic is not good enough, > it needs to be improved. Fortunately, its performance problems are > claimed to be mostly fixed. > b) I was banking on CEDET being an integral part of the Emacs > development version. That is not the case with regard to the > development tools of CEDET allowing to _write_ new mode support > rather than use existing ones (like c-mode support). > c) Nicolas' Scheme/Lisp/Elisp coding style is a world of its own heavily > depending on whatever is available to make for some object oriented > Common Lisp programming style, to a degree where the code is utterly > unfathomable to people not familiar with the libraries providing the > respective syntax macros. Since those facilities are not "built-in" > but heavily rely on macros and support functions, a lot of which are > _not_ to be loaded at runtime for "standard" Emacs modes since they > change Emacs' operation, one has to touch a lot of areas in order to > convert the code into something that can at least _run_ without > loading cl and stuff. > > So this does not look like leading to a common project anytime soon. As > a start, I am working on b), namely pestering CEDET developers to try > getting a version of CEDET useful (and documented) for writing new mode > support into Emacs. > > a) is not going to fly for me: too much code to maintain separately from > Emacs main.
David, All your points are valid. Being more used to Common Lisp, my coding style tends to be much influenced by it. Moreover, I took inspiration on a Common Lisp library, heavily relying on generic functions, multiple dispatch, etc. So indeed my elisp code is far from being idiomatic. Besides, I am not too happy about having reinvented the LR parsing stuff, which is mainly broken anyway. That's mainly why I have not advertised this emacs mode. It works for me, but I don't think it's good enough to make a publishable software. I am keen on seeing your progress. Having a useful lilypond mode in Emacs would be really great. Nicolas _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user