Re: is requiring cl bad?

[Stefan Monnier]

> I was under the impression that requiring cl was bad (TM).  I can't
> remember why.  Is it still so?

The CL package is unclean w.r.t to its use of the namespace.  Using its
macros is tolerated because it only imposes this namespace mess during
byte-compilation of your package, but using its functions imposes the
mess during actual use of your package.

24.3 finally provides an alternative: `cl-lib' which offers the
same functionality but in a namespace-clean way (i.e. using a "cl-"
prefix everywhere).


        Stefan