From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tom Tromey Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: CL package serious deficiencies Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 08:00:40 -0700 Message-ID: References: <33271707.post@talk.nabble.com> <87fwemcwlx.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> <87zkcubbfc.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> <87vcnibb9t.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> <87r4y6bams.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> <4F3198CE.9000900@dancol.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1328713276 31747 80.91.229.3 (8 Feb 2012 15:01:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 15:01:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: egnartsms@gmail.com, lennart.borgman@gmail.com, Emacs-devel@gnu.org, nix@esperi.org.uk, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, Daniel Colascione , drew.adams@oracle.com To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 08 16:01:14 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Rv91F-0002ht-6E for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 08 Feb 2012 16:01:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58224 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Rv91E-0007pJ-Nv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:01:12 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:56541) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Rv917-0007ov-Sq for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:01:11 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Rv912-0003EH-7q for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:01:05 -0500 Original-Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:18995) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Rv910-0003Du-PN; Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:00:59 -0500 Original-Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q18F0j26030854 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 8 Feb 2012 10:00:45 -0500 Original-Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q18F0iLW013365; Wed, 8 Feb 2012 10:00:45 -0500 Original-Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q18F0eSR005812; Wed, 8 Feb 2012 10:00:41 -0500 X-Attribution: Tom In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Wed, 08 Feb 2012 08:28:57 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.92 (gnu/linux) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.67 on 10.5.11.11 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 209.132.183.28 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:148360 Archived-At: >>>>> "RMS" == Richard Stallman writes: RMS> * CL is ugly. It is not well integrated with the rest of Emacs Lisp. The second part seems to me to be a circular argument. It could be better integrated; but it will not be as long as it is not acceptable. RMS> * We would have to document the CL functions in the manual, which is a RMS> big increase in the size. It is not that that is totally intolerable, RMS> it's that the benefit is not worth the burden. Why does this consideration not apply to EIEIO? Tom