From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: CL package serious deficiencies Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:38:15 -0500 Message-ID: References: <33271707.post@talk.nabble.com> <87fwemcwlx.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix> <87d39pgdu4.fsf@gnus.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1328884715 5437 80.91.229.3 (10 Feb 2012 14:38:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 14:38:35 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Nix , Emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 10 15:38:34 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RvrcN-0005xz-4I for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2012 15:38:31 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52969 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RvrcM-0006A8-Gx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:38:30 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:47786) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RvrcE-000686-Vx for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:38:28 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Rvrc9-0008Q7-9W for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:38:22 -0500 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.181]:59049) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Rvrc9-0008Pv-72 for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:38:17 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApwIAMUqNU9MCqD0/2dsb2JhbABErl1+gQiBcgEBBAFWIwULCzQSFBgNJIgPuUuJJoIsEwkEBAI9DAcIBgQIg2QFhBMEiEmbD4Ra X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.73,396,1325480400"; d="scan'208";a="162479244" Original-Received: from 76-10-160-244.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([76.10.160.244]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 10 Feb 2012 09:38:16 -0500 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id BE3B2594C8; Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:38:15 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <87d39pgdu4.fsf@gnus.org> (Lars Ingebrigtsen's message of "Wed, 08 Feb 2012 23:28:03 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.92 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 206.248.154.181 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:148427 Archived-At: >> I've never understood what's wrong with including cl.el, nor why the >> byte-compiler should warn specially about it, any more than it warns >> about any other package. > Since the beginning of time, the Emacs maintainer (whoever they were at > the time) just hasn't liked Common Lisp. Actually, I like many parts of Common Lisp. E.g. I intend to move the compiler macros to the Elisp core (they're pretty much there already since they require support in the bytecompiler). I also like the `setf' macro and related machinery. Of course defstruct is also good (because "more types" is good in my world). > Meanwhile, most of the people who program Emacs Lisp daily (i.e., people > like me) have always been in favour of including it. Who doesn't want > `incf'? I've used incf occasionally, but don't find it terribly important. > `plusp'? Never used it. (> n 0) is no shorter than (plusp n) and is just as clear, so I really don't see the benefit. > `delete-if-not'? That's the big one: some kind of "filter elements based on a predicate" is really handy and we definitely need to have this in core Elisp. OTOH I don't like the -if-not/-if duplication nor all the keyword arguments it takes, which just complicate significantly the implementation with very little benefit to the user/reader. > `position'? I think having cl-position (after (require 'cl-lib)) is good enough for this one (it's handy and more readable than the Elisp replacement, but it's not used often). Stefan