What about adopting Hemlock?

Everybody is free to use a text editor of his or her choice. This is the first time I heard of Hemlock, and I have been using different versions of Emacs for decades. I took a look at the website (https://www.cons.org/cmucl/index.html) and was not convinced. All the manual links are broken, and the latest news item is from 2012.

If you are suggesting the GNU Emacs project should abandon their current code base and adopt Hemlock instead, what problem would that solve? Would it solve the usability or the not-so-sleek look of GNU Emacs mentioned in the article? What about the millions of lines of Elisp code? Would Elisp compatibility be possible to implement in Hemlock? Emacs Lisp is not going away ever.

The port of GNU Emacs to use Guile instead of the built-in Lisp implementation has failed so far, but not because Scheme is a weak language or Guile a bad implementation of Scheme. The problem with Guile Emacs has to do with the difficulty of integrating Guile with Emacs and getting the final bits of Elisp compatibility to work, getting the editor to start up fast enough, etc.

The idea with Guile Emacs is not to replace Emacs Lisp with Scheme (not initially, anyway), but to use a better (faster), and more decoupled implementation. Interest in Guile Emacs has slowed down because people are asking the rhetorical question "what problem does it solve?"