[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Emacs Lisp's future
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: Emacs Lisp's future |
Date: |
Mon, 10 Oct 2016 05:00:29 -0400 |
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
> > Namespace systems do not fit well into Lisp.
> The designers and users of the most important Lisps obviously disagree
> with you:
They are entitled to their opinions but I am not impressed by them.
Common Lisp, Scheme (since R6RS) and Clojure all have either
> namespaces or modules. Racket even has both.
I implemented the Common Lisp name space facility on the Lisp machine,
and I found it was inconvenient for actual use. It is better always
to use the full name.
--
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation (gnu.org, fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (internethalloffame.org)
Skype: No way! See stallman.org/skype.html.
Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Helmut Eller, 2016/10/08
Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Richard Stallman, 2016/10/08
Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Nicolas Petton, 2016/10/08
Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Helmut Eller, 2016/10/08
Re: Emacs Lisp's future,
Richard Stallman <=
Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Richard Stallman, 2016/10/10
Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Helmut Eller, 2016/10/11
Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Elias Mårtenson, 2016/10/11
Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Tom Tromey, 2016/10/11
Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Richard Stallman, 2016/10/13
Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Tom Tromey, 2016/10/13
Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Richard Stallman, 2016/10/16
Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Georges Ko, 2016/10/10
Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Clément Pit--Claudel, 2016/10/10
Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Georges Ko, 2016/10/10