[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?)
From: |
Pascal J. Bourguignon |
Subject: |
Re: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?) |
Date: |
Fri, 26 Jul 2013 19:01:08 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (gnu/linux) |
Drew Adams <address@hidden> writes:
>> http://nic.ferrier.me.uk/blog/2013_06/adding-namespaces-to-elis pis
>> a proposal to add namespaces to emacs-lisp.
>>
>> I'd be really interested in what people think about this, whether it
>> would be worth my time trying to do this or not.
>
> OK, I'll start. I am in favor of the Common Lisp spec - IOW, Common
> Lisp "packages". I am in favor of such a namespace system for Emacs
> Lisp.
>
> I read your proposal overview, Nic. It's not clear to me just what
> the differences would be from the Common Lisp package system.
> Perhaps you could spell the differences out in more detail somewhere.
>
> But the closer we can get to the CL spec the better, IMO. If we
> could conform to it completely, that would be great.
>
> Even keeping the same terminology, symbol names etc. as CL would
> help. It would help users who are coming from Common Lisp or who
> happen to read Common Lisp doc.
>
> And it would help the reuse/transfer of existing code from CL to
> Elisp. (Yes, such reuse/transfer might require some massaging, but
> similar syntax and semantics would help minimize that operation.)
>
> Of course, adopting CL terminology in this regard should mean that
> we would drop the terminology used so far for Emacs "packages".
> An argument can be made that both uses of the word "package" are
> somewhat unfortunate.
>
> At this point, I think conforming to the terminology that has been
> used in CL for 30 years is the right approach, regardless of
> whether CL "packages" are really, in effect, namespaces.
>
> So +1 for adding CL-style namespaces to Emacs Lisp. One opinion.
+1
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.
You know you've been lisping too long when you see a recent picture of George
Lucas and think "Wait, I thought John McCarthy was dead!" -- Dalek_Baldwin
- Re: CommonLisp namespace system (was Re: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?)), (continued)
- RE: CommonLisp namespace system (was Re: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?)), Drew Adams, 2013/07/26
- Re: CommonLisp namespace system (was Re: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?)), Richard Stallman, 2013/07/27
- RE: CommonLisp namespace system (was Re: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?)), Drew Adams, 2013/07/26
- Re: CommonLisp namespace system (was Re: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?)), Juanma Barranquero, 2013/07/26
- Re: CommonLisp namespace system (was Re: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?)), Pascal J. Bourguignon, 2013/07/26
- Re: CommonLisp namespace system (was Re: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?)), Nic Ferrier, 2013/07/26
Re: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?),
Pascal J. Bourguignon <=
Re: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?), Richard Stallman, 2013/07/27
Re: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?), Stefan Monnier, 2013/07/26
- Re: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?), Nic Ferrier, 2013/07/26
- Re: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?), Stefan Monnier, 2013/07/26
- Re: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?), Nic Ferrier, 2013/07/26
- Re: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?), Stefan Monnier, 2013/07/26
- Re: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?), Nic Ferrier, 2013/07/26
- RE: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?), Drew Adams, 2013/07/26
- Re: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?), Stefan Monnier, 2013/07/26
- Re: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?), Nic Ferrier, 2013/07/26