[mapcar]

Right, it's the "pretty much" part that's a little disturbing. Would be nice to know why this caveat is always thrown around.

[rcthompson]

Well, the message gives specific examples of the kinds of code that might need to be modified: "debuggers, macroexpanders and code-walkers".

[tedks]

I think this is incorrect, the point of Guile-Emacs is to implement support for all Emacs Lisp in Guile. No backwards-incompatibility will be present in whatever Emacs eventually moves to.

[davexunit]

One example is that some extensions such as Gnus have contain code written in the current Elisp interpreter's bytecode, which is incompatible with the Guile VM.

[parfe]

From the submitted email:

>Guile-Emacs loads, compiles and executes the programs included in Emacs by default, plus Gnus, Org-Mode, and more.