Regardless of whether you prefer Scheme or CL, would you agree that either of them would nevertheless be better than elisp for a new Emacs?
Go to the EmacsChannel and type:
,langpollresults is also <nick>: <your answer>
fsbot will add your entry to the list.
DISCLAIMER: The percentages might not add up to 100% since I rounded at the tenths place.
Yes [either Scheme or CL would be preferred to EmacsLisp]: 21 (55.3%)
No is preferred to Scheme and CL: 7 (18.4%)
Off-topic: 10 (26.3%)
 Riastradh: either would be fine.
 forcer: Scheme > CL > elisp, so either would be fine ;)
 jao: yes, i would
 odin: Brainf*ck. (Seriously, yes.)
 emu: either CL or Scheme is better, but Scheme would require a lot of extensions
 palomer: vi-script
 blicero: either is fine, provided that they let me make extensions to help me be successful with the fairer sex
 e1f: perl
 hoan: yes
 cococrisp: no. CL would be ok, but not guile.
 bkhl: yes.
 edrx: no - but maybe I’ll change my mind after seeing the code for this new Emacs
 erik: scheme or bust!
 mathrick: I’m cool with CL, as long as I get Emacs’ core redesigned from scratch. Scheme is butt ugly with it’s #t and #f, tho
 kensanata: no
 Khmar : A discussion on the wiki would be more fruitful than a poll.
 datamatrix: Common Lisp would be great IMHO 😊
 deego: IIUC, CL still doesn’t have a freely distributable language-spec or documentation
 buckfunk since learning elisp i’d prefer to continue with elisp - but scheme looks nice too … no CL pls
 JoshTriplett: No; I’d rather see whatever features people want from those LISP variants added to elisp.
 aristocat: yes
 p00ya: so where does guile fit in
 Lukhas: Elisp is nice, but if i have to choose between CL and Scheme, i’d choose Scheme
 mwolson: no, stick with elisp, but don’t be afraid to add new features to it
 fledermaus: moving seems like a lot of work, better to add tail recursion, closures etc to elisp, I reckon.
 smitty1e: python, pymacs, boost::python, pl/python, pythonwin, let’s just get on the snake
 jemfinch: yes
 maxen: scheme would be better than elisp (I am sure), whether common lisp would be a real improvement, mhh
 jdavidboyd: no
 Sonderblade: PYTHON!
 hober: CL > elisp > scheme
 pipeline: CL > Scheme > Guile > Teco > Unlambda > Brainf*ck > A magnet on my monitor > elisp.
 sev: yes, and CL is much better
 TauPan: yes, definitely
 utis: ISLisp! Other than that I don’t care.
 sayke, yes, CL
 brett_: yes, CL
 davidw: yes, mzscheme
If you’d like to participate via editing this page rather than going the #emacs channel, feel free to do so in this section, right here.
See also ExtensionLanguageAdvocacy.