Re: Editing Scheme in the installation image

2017-01-09 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Christopher Allan Webber skribis: > Ludovic Courtès writes: > >> Mike Gran skribis: >> On Sunday, January 8, 2017 2:48 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> >> [...] >> I think it would take more than elisp compilation support to port Emacs packages to Zile-on-Guile. Essentially we’d need

Re: Editing Scheme in the installation image

2017-01-08 Thread Christopher Allan Webber
Ludovic Courtès writes: > Mike Gran skribis: > >>>On Sunday, January 8, 2017 2:48 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > > [...] > >>>I think it would take more than elisp compilation support to port Emacs >>>packages to Zile-on-Guile. Essentially we’d need many APIs that Emacs >>>provides. >> >> I looke

Re: Editing Scheme in the installation image

2017-01-08 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Mike Gran skribis: >>On Sunday, January 8, 2017 2:48 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: [...] >>I think it would take more than elisp compilation support to port Emacs >>packages to Zile-on-Guile. Essentially we’d need many APIs that Emacs >>provides. > > I looked at the current beta of paredit, and

Re: Editing Scheme in the installation image

2017-01-08 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hello, Maxim Cournoyer skribis: > l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > >> Mike Gran skribis: >> >>> The functions expressed in Scheme in Zile-on-Guile are the same >>> as upstream Zile had. It is a fairly limited set. >>> Zile-on-Guile is a Scheme, not an elisp, even though the functions >

Re: Editing Scheme in the installation image

2017-01-07 Thread Maxim Cournoyer
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > Mike Gran skribis: > >> The functions expressed in Scheme in Zile-on-Guile are the same >> as upstream Zile had. It is a fairly limited set. >> Zile-on-Guile is a Scheme, not an elisp, even though the functions >> it expresses have elisp-like names. So th

Re: Editing Scheme in the installation image

2017-01-07 Thread Christopher Allan Webber
Ludovic Courtès writes: > Hello Guix! > > One issue that’s often reported is that it’s inconvenient to edit the > config file with all its parentheses in the installation image given the > available options (Zile, Nano, and nvi). > > Something like Paredit and ‘show-paren-mode’ in Emacs would help

Re: Editing Scheme in the installation image

2017-01-07 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi Mike! Mike Gran skribis: > Could work, but, there are caveats. > This Zile fork, and upstream Zile, have characters restricted to 8-bits > in most places. It also will not do any bi-directional characters > or double-width characters. For non-ASCII config files, Zile-on-Guile > might be too

Re: Editing Scheme in the installation image

2017-01-06 Thread Ricardo Wurmus
Ludovic Courtès writes: > One issue that’s often reported is that it’s inconvenient to edit the > config file with all its parentheses in the installation image given the > available options (Zile, Nano, and nvi). > > Something like Paredit and ‘show-paren-mode’ in Emacs would help avoid > mista

Re: Editing Scheme in the installation image

2017-01-05 Thread Kei Kebreau
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > Hello Guix! > > One issue that’s often reported is that it’s inconvenient to edit the > config file with all its parentheses in the installation image given the > available options (Zile, Nano, and nvi). > > Something like Paredit and ‘show-paren-mode’ in E

Editing Scheme in the installation image

2017-01-05 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hello Guix! One issue that’s often reported is that it’s inconvenient to edit the config file with all its parentheses in the installation image given the available options (Zile, Nano, and nvi). Something like Paredit and ‘show-paren-mode’ in Emacs would help avoid mistakes such as unbalanced pa