[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Help sought understanding shorthands wrt modules/packages

From: João Távora
Subject: Re: Help sought understanding shorthands wrt modules/packages
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2022 04:52:29 +0000

On Tue, Nov 8, 2022 at 12:27 AM Matt Armstrong <matt@rfc20.org> wrote:
João Távora <joaotavora@gmail.com> writes:

> If you're talking about the :USE directive, you don't have to employ
> it: it's not mandatory for CL packages to be immensely better. But
> it's very useful and convenient in specific, well-understood
> situations.  If you're talking about something else, I don't know what
> it might me.

My understanding is that Richard is concerned about ambiguities, perhaps
not even flagged as errors at load time, that occurred in a version of
CL packages he implemented or otherwise worked with in the past, but
that may no longer occur in Common Lisp implementations conforming to
the newest standard.  I believe he described the "misfeature" he is
concerned about more clearly in
There, I think Gerd made the convincing argument that the situation is
acceptable in current CL standards.

Thanks, I read that description, and as far as I can gather, only
USE-PACKAGE vaguely fits that description,


It's an optional feature that shouldn't be used -- much like -rf to rm or
really any flag to any program -- if you one doesn't understand what it does.
It will error and offer restarts if two used packages export symbols with the
same name. 

Which reminds me.... I wonder if Gerd's branch also comes with a programmable
interactive restart system :-)


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]