On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 5:12 AM Gerd Möllmann wrote: João Távora writes: > Hi Gerd, I'm there one who implemented shorthands in Emacs, and i sure > don't think they are a substitute for CL packages. Thanks for letting me know, Joao. No problem. Allow me to mount a short defense of shorthands. In doing so, I don't mean to imply -- by any measure -- that CL packages are a much welcomed addition to Emacs. They are, absolutely. * shorthands are designed to perform namespacing operations with minimal or even no changes to the Lisp forms of an Elisp file. The hypothetical file x.el: (defvar x--bar 42) (defun x-foo () x--bar) (provide 'x) ;; x.el ends here ;; Local Variables: ;; read-symbol-shorthands: (("x-" . "xenomorph-")) ;; End: which will pollute the global namespace when loaded into Emacs 27, will, when loaded into Emacs >28, intern xenomorph--bar and xenomorph-foo instead of x--bar and x-foo. Its user file yummy.el (require 'x) (defun yummy () (x-foo)) ;; yummy.el ends here ;; Local Variables: ;; read-symbol-shorthands: (("x-" . "xenomorph-")) ;; End: can also be loaded into Emacs 27 and Emacs 28. The interaction between the two packages works in both cases, but in Emacs 28 the global namespace won't be polluted. * The above use case was motivated by the s.el, dash.el and f.el libraries which incur in this namespace pollution. To be clear, all packages pollute the namespace but these short prefixed ones were especially heavy polluters, since short names naturally appear more frequently in completion lists. * If CL packages had been used instead, this "double duty" wouldn't have been possible, because x.el and y.el would have to be changed considerably (admittedly in a rather straightforward fashion) * When shorthands were presented, much criticism was leveled at it, some stemming from a misunderstanding of the specific problem this attempts to solve. * But one of the criticisms is pretty reasonable: this "breaks grep" because the same symbol can now be referenced by two different character strings from two different contexts. Also two different symbols are designated by the same character string, again in two different contexts. However, the same is true for every namespacing facility by definition. This is what namespacing systems do. * Anyway, the problem is that grep xenomorph-foo x.el yummy.el doesn't return anything, even though xenomorph-foo is really the name of the symbol in obarray. Obviously, grep doesn't understand ELisp. * In my opinion, the part that is missing from shorthands is a tool that replaces grep (for Lisp symbolic uses, of course) and understands and can be used as a backend for xref-find-references. One can think of different approaches for realizing this tool * The most promising approach, IMO, to fix this is to create a new binary program, call it 'sexgrep' (for "Symbolic Expression Grep") which can be run separately from Emacs but which uses Emacs's reader syntax. It could reuse lread.c maybe, or reimplement relevant parts of it. The program's input is a full symbol name and a number of Elisp files. By using a source-tracking reader and understanding the relatively simple syntax of shorthand definitions, it'll make sexpgrep xenomorph-foo yummy.el x.el find matches for the search pattern in those two files (on line 2) respectively. * Taking the approach with CL packages would be more difficult, because the program would need to have a Lisp evaluator that understands CL:DEFPACKAGE and CL:IN-PACKAGE, not just a reader. This is why, in the Common Lisp implementations that I've used, a global in-memory database of symbols is used instead. The database is kept up-to-date whenever the code is read and loaded (which may occur in two different moments in time, if compiled files are used). This also works nicely (SLIME and SLY use it to great effect). But it fails to search code that isn't loaded and is subject to some annoying but resolvable problems (like when loading CL fasls that were compiled on a different machine, for example. Maybe Helmut Eller, SLIME author, has some good input in this regard)