Re: Cleaning up the EIEIO namespace

[Vitalie Spinu <spinuvit@gmail.com>]

  >> Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
  >> on Thu, 14 Feb 2013 17:16:21 -0500 wrote:

 >>> Actually, there's a misunderstanding here:
 >>> - setf was indeed part of CL, but being a macro it was accepted
 >>> (i.e. you don't need to have it defined at run-time, since it's
 >>> macro-expanded during compilation).
 >>> - setf is part of core Elisp in Emacs-24.3.
 >>> So maybe we don't need oref/oset at all.
 >> Yes, although I like "(oset foo bar 'baz)" much better than the verbose
 >> (setf (cl-slot-value foo 'bar) 'baz)
 >> But I can understand that you want to get rid of it, and package writers
 >> can still define their own macros/accessors.

 > I actually don't particular care if we keep them or not, except that if
 > we keep them, we need to give them a prefix.

Could please eieio-oref/eieio-oset be avoided?  oref/oset are so often
used that people will start aliasing them anyways.

How about replacing eieio-, the most awkward prefix in existence, with
simple "eo-", standing for Emacs Objects? Then eoref/eoset can be used
as (almost) namespace clean alternatives.

    Vitalie