Re: cc-langs.el

[Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org>]

On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 01:45:44PM +0200, Martin Stjernholm wrote:
> I still don't understand this aversion to the CL functions. I find it
> absurd that there is an old and well established set of basic tools
> that can't be used in many situations.

I can't speak for Richard, but my aversion is because cl is of extremely
variable quality -- much of it is very handy, but some of it really sucks (in
many cases unavoidably, because it tries to do things that don't fit well
into emacs' lisp engine, and unfortunately its all packaged as one big ball
of hair.  It's trying to provide compatibility that ultimately (1) can't be
done exactly, and (2) sometimes causes big performance problems by trying.

I would be a lot happier if the functionality were split up somehow, and the
uncontroversial bits basically made into a separate package that makes no
attempt to be `common-lisp,' but rather just tries to be a useful toolkit for
elisp, and is optimized for such.

[BTW, I love common-lisp, but cl is not it; sometimes it seems almost a
mockery...]

-Miles
-- 
Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it
has to be us.  -- Jerry Garcia


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: VM Ware
With VMware you can run multiple operating systems on a single machine.
WITHOUT REBOOTING! Mix Linux / Windows / Novell virtual machines
at the same time. Free trial click here:http://www.vmware.com/wl/offer/358/0