From ... From: Erik Naggum Subject: Re: E-lisp primitives unextendible [was: Lisp versus C++ for AI. software] Date: 1996/11/01 Message-ID: <3055832195897961@naggum.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 193640720 sender: erik@arcana.naggum.no references: <3250E6C3.3963@eis.uva.es> <325B0122.1BCF@sybase.com> <3053855957080527@naggum.no> <325C6020.47F6@sybase.com> <53i5rv$jp2@Godzilla.cs.nwu.edu> <53rl90$f3q@nic.wat.hookup.net> <3263D027.14B9@dma.isg.mot.com> <3054455602757056@naggum.no> organization: Naggum Software; +47 2295 0313; http://www.naggum.no newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp,comp.lang.c++,comp.emacs * Bill Dubuque | The C-implemented e-lisp primitives are certainly not 100% compatible | with those implemented in e-lisp. For example, one cannot advise (or | redefine) them because there is often C-level calls to such primitives | and such C-level calls do not call indirectly through the symbol-function | cell. Such "hardcoded" calls make it extremely difficult to implement | extensions to Emacs (witness the convoluted code due to loops that had to | be jumped through to do things like ange-ftp, etc). FWIW, there is also the byte code machine, which performs a number of operations directly without calling any functions. #\Erik -- Those who do not know Lisp are doomed to reimplement it.