names VS emacs-ng

I understand what you mean, and in my opinion, global namespace is not a problem for a language meant to extend an application. Obserer that purpose of elisp is (ok. was) to extend Emacs. Global namespace is actually feature here. However, Emacs has indeed evolved into an application framework, or at least, people are tring to use it so. In some cases then namespaces are good. While Emacs does not have a built-in namespace (yet?), you can use some of the namespace packages. I have personaly once needed a namespace for a project of mine, and have been looking into names, which I think is quite good. You can also use buffer local variables and hash tables/obarrays to accomplish lots of stuff you would use a namespace for. I ended up using an obarray (you can search mail archives and read some of tips I got).

This is exactly what emacs-ng does?

https://emacs-ng.github.io/emacs-ng/

> This project should be considered an additive native layer over emacs, bringing features like Deno's Javascript and Async I/O environment, Mozilla's Webrender, and other features in development. emacs-ng's approach is to utilize multiple new development approaches and tools to bring Emacs to the next level. It is maintained by a team that loves Emacs and everything it stands for - being totally introspectable, with a fully customizable and free development environment. We want Emacs to be a editor 40+ years from now that has the flexibility and design to keep up with progressive technology.

I guess it uses webrender instead of electron?

Now I'm failing on this instead: https://github.com/emacs-ng/emacs-ng/issues/218

Presumably because of emacs-ng [1], from the page " additive native layer over emacs, bringing features like Deno's Javascript and Async I/O environment, Mozilla's Webrender,".

[1] https://github.com/emacs-ng/emacs-ng