From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: tomas@tuxteam.de Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: cl-lib warnings Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2022 12:33:31 +0100 Message-ID: References: <83a63fap35.fsf@gnu.org> <83bknu8tmo.fsf@gnu.org> <18E95AC5-1FFC-4025-B804-7D70DDB1BD75@gmail.com> <87y1qw2yt4.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="QCsGxgwqNPsB6+Dr" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="10640"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel To: =?utf-8?B?Sm/Do28gVMOhdm9yYQ==?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 25 12:34:26 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1p9PGq-0002Wk-R2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 25 Dec 2022 12:34:24 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p9PG5-00060b-5J; Sun, 25 Dec 2022 06:33:37 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p9PG3-00060P-P5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Dec 2022 06:33:35 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.tuxteam.de ([5.199.139.25]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p9PG1-0008Cp-R5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Dec 2022 06:33:35 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tuxteam.de; s=mail; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject :Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=IWj7FvFRshXk0ZGGbkALEDF0q04LBctRBQS0Xce2iBw=; b=MP1YcCPPEPiwsXYY8qhlr88NC9 x8pCoRv7pBSjrLpGAmvhCEoplAPJMAnRB++4bUlSyAxRFTyJzxNmfGFCbHBZzUKI/P1RyBEMv1J+X 1QDJXTi/qf5RryAX1thTgp6sjD6iUURIKfN47FekLqZF/cYZGzIUKBxRHOSVGSwSa748Wjd1Ypya4 SKIrCI9CJny9n891ewXvpVXi+5GekLKnBnibMbqllTrsIT0qD5EOytIwFK6kSk/XbbLFwpuBrpAHf kEiuLddQYOoLcpYH0Rzt5Gv0ipj9I18URZKanXUcfObw/eChsgxQmqspCtmvyB8loRWe21jOpDHns LpHftSKQ==; Original-Received: from tomas by mail.tuxteam.de with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1p9PFz-0000oB-7S; Sun, 25 Dec 2022 12:33:31 +0100 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=5.199.139.25; envelope-from=tomas@tuxteam.de; helo=mail.tuxteam.de X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:301912 Archived-At: --QCsGxgwqNPsB6+Dr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Dec 25, 2022 at 09:55:27AM +0000, Jo=C3=A3o T=C3=A1vora wrote: > On Sun, Dec 25, 2022, 07:03 wrote: >=20 > To add confusion to this, I'm a somewhat "in between" type and find > > the Lisps ambiguity quite charming. If I had to describe where I > > see myself, I'd say "functional in the large, indulging imperatives > > in the small" or something. >=20 >=20 > Yes, quite. Is it a good time to ask, since we're all huggy wuggy about > Lisp's inclusive style, why the new Scheme stuff gets a namespacing hall > pass while the CL stuff was all banished to akward prefix-land? *<:-) Actually quite an interesting topic, but I fear that this mailing list's margins will be too narrow to scribble it down (IOW: we are moving dangerously off-topic). Where do we navigate the sea between "strict, but everyone understands at a glance" and "permissive, but the land splinters into different subcultures incapable of working together"? With Lisp (in the broad sense), all is possible. Something for computer language sociologists to ponder. Again, personally, I'd tend towards diversity, but I'm aware of the downsides. Cheers --=20 t --QCsGxgwqNPsB6+Dr Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EABECAB0WIQRp53liolZD6iXhAoIFyCz1etHaRgUCY6g1BAAKCRAFyCz1etHa RvD6AJsFGtdukopLLQp2hE2FbgZQs0VZcgCfX4et+AodPlwxTTlQjH6K7oYYG3s= =9xX0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --QCsGxgwqNPsB6+Dr--