Lem: A Common Lisp editor/IDE with high expansibility

Re:Lem: A Common Lisp editor/IDE with high expansibility by insertcredit on Saturday March 16, 2019 @11:01AM (#19408142)

I mentioned the problem Lem claims to solve and proved that there are existing solutions to that problem. I also put forth that Lem is inferior to Emacs/SLIME/Sly when writing Lisp which should be obvious to anyone with Emacs experience. Then I made additional points which at least two people found of interest and tried to provide answers to.

I'm pretty sure all of that does not translate in me not telling you anything.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Lem: A Common Lisp editor/IDE with high expansibility by bauerd on Saturday March 16, 2019 @12:01PM (#19408432)

There can be multiple solutions to one problem, there's nothing wrong with experimentation. You seem to think it's OK to call any Emacs competitor crapware?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Lem: A Common Lisp editor/IDE with high expansibility by insertcredit on Saturday March 16, 2019 @12:22PM (#19408583)

I defined crapware as something which dilutes the space of good libraries, offers nothing new and pretends to solve non-existing problems. I made my case.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Lem: A Common Lisp editor/IDE with high expansibility by lispm on Saturday March 16, 2019 @02:17PM (#19409275)

The problems GNU Emacs does not solve for a CL programmer is its generally clunky user interface, lack of GUI features, its non-reusability in a Common Lisp program and its non-source-compatibility with Common Lisp. GNU Emacs will always be an extra component to a CL program and rarely will be the right user interface for a CL program - even though the program might need editor functionality.

One can get very far with it, but for some the combination of above is enough reason to look for alternatives.

[ Parent | on HN ]