I would really like to see this kind of work be done upstream. Emacs still looks the same as it did decades ago despite other editors advancing and becoming more user friendly.
replies(8):
Familiar UX is not the kind of multiplier. Learning Lisp REPL idioms is the multiplier. Selling Emacs with "easy" may have adverse effects in the long run - it sets the wrong expectations from the get-go. Every Emacs discussion typically gets a few "I tried Emacs for a long time and it just didn't work for me..." type of comments. When you dig deeper, you typically hear that they've been trying to use mostly the editor, ignoring much of the Lisp functionality. Unlocking the power of Lisp is what gets you into "turbo" mode in Emacs.
I get it - Elisp is an absolute opposite of being easy and intuitive, even experienced coders who already used modern Lisps like Clojure often complain that it just doesn't feel comfortable. Common Lispers don't like it either. Schemers have little love to share for it as well - it's a common theme.
Unfortunately, that's the Lisp we have, and until we figure out a better alternative, we have no choice. FWIW, it's still a Lisp, and it's still far better than anything else that's non-lispy. The simplicity and dynamism of Lisp is what allows you to quickly move forward, to build things that defy expectations, extend things beyond common sense when required.
We have many examples of when people with no programming background grind through the Elisp tutorial without any prejudice and start building things that eventually turn into legendary packages. Perhaps it's more valuable to cater "beginner Emacs experience" for these kinds of personalities, rather than trying to appeal to reactjs/springboot/django divas with "decades of programming experience" that demand tabs, sidebars and minimaps; twist their faces whenever they have to stare at Elisp stacktraces and complain that "Emacs doesn't look modern enough"?