RE: [Emacs-diffs] emacs-25 a9c48d5: Additional fixes for file notification

[Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>]

> > I suppose someone could argue that this ugliness might dissuade
> > people from using these functions.
> 
> FWIW, I dislike cXXXXr, indeed.  It makes me feel like I'm looking at
> assembly code.
> 
> > I realize there are prefix-less aliases for most of these functions.
> 
> Actually, no.  There isn't.  If you find some, it's only because you
> happen to have `cl' loaded.

(Not very important, but your quoting above makes it seem that the same
person said both of the things you quoted.  I said the first; Oleh said
the second.)

Wrt cXXXXr, we can all agree, I'm guessing, that context-specific
accessor macros (or functions) that do the same thing are friendlier.
They tell you what the parts you are accessing mean, in context.

But for those lispers who are used to cXXXXr, these functions can
certainly be useful in local contexts (versus introducing a local,
and perhaps meaningless, name).

And yes, they are _good pictures_, showing you just which parts of
a tree are being accessed.  They don't tell you what those structure
parts mean in any given context, but they certainly show you clearly
where the parts are.

Just because such functions exist in Lisp is no reason that any
given Lisp program or programmer has to use them.  But not wanting
to use them is not a good reason to rename them with a `cl-' prefix.