>>105683094
>Wrong. Language stability and longevity are essential for extensibility.
In so far as the changes to an implementation of a language used for extensibility actually exist within the project itself.
If someone makes a version of lua that has huge breaking changes across a large amount of code, that's not really the problem of people using a particular implementation of lua, in the same way that clojure's existence is completely irrelevant to elisp.
if puc rio releases lua 6.0 that completely breaks everything, or luajit makes some breaking change with their dialect, neither of these things affect me.
>Lisp code written some 30 years ago will most of the time, without issue, work on a modern Common Lisp implementation
I can't plug the lisp parts of emacs into SBCL and it'll just work.
but I do get the same "most of the time" lua code written 20 years ago still works without issue in a modern lua implemention.
and of course to reiterate what I say above, changes other codebases make to their implementation of lua doesn't affect me. changing the implementation of lua to a different version is the equivalent of trying to replace elisp and it's VM with say, guile.

Back | Go to board

Board:

/g/

Thread:

>released in 1976>still in use by the most skilled programmersWhat makes EMACS stand the test of time?

>released in 1976
>still in use by the most skilled programmers
What makes EMACS stand the test of time?