From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Pascal J. Bourguignon" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 19:01:08 +0200 Organization: Informatimago Message-ID: <87fvv12r3f.fsf@informatimago.com> References: <874nbh2z3y.fsf@ferrier.me.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1374858115 26514 80.91.229.3 (26 Jul 2013 17:01:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 17:01:55 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 26 19:01:56 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1V2lOt-0007wb-7H for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 19:01:55 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51387 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V2lOs-0004Pu-QC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 13:01:54 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54779) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V2lOn-0004Ie-Nv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 13:01:50 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V2lOm-0003Iz-5F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 13:01:49 -0400 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:44379) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V2lOl-0003If-WC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 13:01:48 -0400 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1V2lOj-0007pD-DK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 19:01:45 +0200 Original-Received: from amontsouris-651-1-252-173.w92-163.abo.wanadoo.fr ([92.163.83.173]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 19:01:45 +0200 Original-Received: from pjb by amontsouris-651-1-252-173.w92-163.abo.wanadoo.fr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 19:01:45 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 45 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: amontsouris-651-1-252-173.w92-163.abo.wanadoo.fr Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwAQMAAABtzGvEAAAABlBMVEUAAAD///+l2Z/dAAAA oElEQVR4nK3OsRHCMAwF0O8YQufUNIQRGIAja9CxSA55AxZgFO4coMgYrEDDQZWPIlNAjwq9 033pbOBPtbXuB6PKNBn5gZkhGa86Z4x2wE67O+06WxGD/HCOGR0deY3f9Ijwwt7rNGNf6Oac l/GuZTF1wFGKiYYHKSFAkjIo1b6sCYS1sVmFhhhahKQssRjRT90ITWUk6vvK3RsPGs+M1RuR mV+hO/VvFAAAAABJRU5ErkJggg== X-Accept-Language: fr, es, en User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:OWVkMjRiOWNiNTM5YTE2NTdmMDZjZjA5NThhZGU4YjlkODQyZWY2ZA== X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 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:162152 Archived-At: Drew Adams writes: >> http://nic.ferrier.me.uk/blog/2013_06/adding-namespaces-to-elis pis >> a proposal to add namespaces to emacs-lisp. >> >> I'd be really interested in what people think about this, whether it >> would be worth my time trying to do this or not. > > OK, I'll start. I am in favor of the Common Lisp spec - IOW, Common > Lisp "packages". I am in favor of such a namespace system for Emacs > Lisp. > > I read your proposal overview, Nic. It's not clear to me just what > the differences would be from the Common Lisp package system. > Perhaps you could spell the differences out in more detail somewhere. > > But the closer we can get to the CL spec the better, IMO. If we > could conform to it completely, that would be great. > > Even keeping the same terminology, symbol names etc. as CL would > help. It would help users who are coming from Common Lisp or who > happen to read Common Lisp doc. > > And it would help the reuse/transfer of existing code from CL to > Elisp. (Yes, such reuse/transfer might require some massaging, but > similar syntax and semantics would help minimize that operation.) > > Of course, adopting CL terminology in this regard should mean that > we would drop the terminology used so far for Emacs "packages". > An argument can be made that both uses of the word "package" are > somewhat unfortunate. > > At this point, I think conforming to the terminology that has been > used in CL for 30 years is the right approach, regardless of > whether CL "packages" are really, in effect, namespaces. > > So +1 for adding CL-style namespaces to Emacs Lisp. One opinion. +1 -- __Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/ A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}. You know you've been lisping too long when you see a recent picture of George Lucas and think "Wait, I thought John McCarthy was dead!" -- Dalek_Baldwin