Re: [ELPA] New package: transient

[Stefan Monnier]

> Sure, if we don't mind having much more symbols, why not?  But someone
> would have to come up with such a classification, and that may not
> always be easy.

Reaching the "end goal" is indeed quite hard (after all, it's
a classification job so it's both hard and impossible).

Making steps toward that goal should be pretty easy, OTOH.

The benefits will likely be small as well, sadly: it will take time and
efforts for the code to start making use of those new names, and during
many many years both names will have to exist.

The success of the `f` and `s` libraries suggests that it might be worth
the trouble, tho.

We could start with the existing "file-name-" prefix and add to it the
few functions which don't obey that prefix (e.g.  `abbrev-file-name` and
`expand-file-name`).


        Stefan