"Thomas S. Dye" <tsd@tsdye.online> writes: > My hunch is that the ext: part of ext:gforth expects that > forth-mode is setup to use the forth-mode distributed with GForth.
Yes. Our policy is to support the official distribution when possible. Supporting non-standard packages is optional. > Spacemacs appears to use forth-mode from Elpa, instead, and I find > forth-mode.el in the elpa subdirectory of my Spacemacs. I would be surprised if such a name clash happened on ELPA. Indeed, it does not. There is no such package on ELPA. Nonstandard forth-mode that overrides the official gforth distribution is on MELPA: https://melpa.org/#/forth-mode Overriding the namespace is a bug. It must be fixed on https://github.com/larsbrinkhoff/forth-mode/ side. > If so, could ob-forth.el be patched to enable all Emacs > users--plain, Spacemacs, Doom, Prelude, Scimax, etc.--to evaluate > Forth code blocks? Or, should ob-doc-forth give instructions how > to setup forth-mode to use the one distributed with GForth? > > What is the best way forward here? forth-mode from MELPA is grabbing the official namespace. This problem has been reported in https://github.com/larsbrinkhoff/forth-mode/issues/19 but was not acted upon. It is honestly not our job to fix such things. I suggest emphasizing that ob-forth expects forth-mode distributed officially. ob-forth broken with Spacemacs/Doom/etc is a problem of Spacemacs/Doom/etc. Distributing a package does not follow the basic lisp conventions is not nice. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode maintainer, Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>. Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>, or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>
