🚀 go-pugleaf

Also sprach Barry Margolin (barmar@think.com):
>I also find your reference to "*just* the editing interface" curious.
>Emacs is primarily an editor, so the editing interface is an important part
>of it.

I am not surprised by your comment. I mainly live in the VMS world
with TPU which makes a clear distinction between TPU itself on the
one hand which provides you the tools to write the editing interface
and tis interface on the other. TPU includes a set of built-ins, a 
set of types (integers, buffer, windows, pattern etc.), redrawing 
algorithms and not the least a compiler to compile code in the 
specific VAXTPU language in which you implement the editing interface, 
which for instance provide all key bindings. If you start up TPU 
without neither a section file (compiled VAXTPU) nor a command file
(interpreted VAXTPU) all you get is a blank screen, and CTRL/Y is
the only way out.

The standard editing interface as delivered with VMS is EVE, but
if you like you write your completely own editing interface, and
being somewhat crazy I have done this.

>I guess the problem is that there is no clear agreement on what is
>"kernel-emacs".  To me, part of the definition of Emacs is that the default
>binding of meta-B (for instance) is to move the cursor backward by a word;
>i.e. I consider the simple word motion commands to be part of the Emacs
>kernel.  In GNU Emacs, backward-word is written in Elisp.

Emacs is much fuzzier than TPU, and I would presume that there is
a lot of Lisp code loaded as I write these words (I'm do news on
Unix) which I don't use. Like backward-word for instance. I have
such a function in my editor interface, but since I don't agree
with Stallman on how it should work I have written my own. (My
TPU and Emacs interfaces are roughly equivalent.)
-- 
Erland Sommarskog - ENEA Data, Stockholm - sommar@enea.se
Le fils de maire est en Normandie avec beaucoup de medecins.