[jimbokun]

Understandable, but it also seems like there is a disconnect between the philosophy of vi and the philosophy of Lisp. Vi is designed to be purely a text editor, and not an environment for building text based applications. Common Lisp being so inherently interactive, seems to require a dynamic, interactive text editing environment. Like Emacs.

[kunley]

Hmm, IIRC Paul Graham also used vi most of his coding years. So yes, great things can be accomplished with vi in the Lisp galaxy.

[ngcc_hk]

But that is old. Vim can easily interact with lisp real time. It would and probably never will be the same as emacs which is a lisp env. Still it is good enough.

[p_l]

GNU Emacs nor XEmacs also can not behave like ZMACS on lisp machines - there's just as much disconnect as between (n)ViM and lisp image. It's always a remote, RPC-like relation.

In fact, I'd say that a certain ancient Erlang mode for Emacs resulted in closer relationship between Emacs and Erlang, as it made Emacs into a process in OTP cluster.

[mbrock]

There's also an interesting SWI-Prolog mode that embeds the language runtime with dynamic linking and integrates quite deeply.