[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: is requiring cl bad?
From: |
Ivan Kanis |
Subject: |
Re: is requiring cl bad? |
Date: |
Mon, 17 Dec 2012 21:58:18 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) |
Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> wrote:
>> I was under the impression that requiring cl was bad (TM). I can't
>> remember why. Is it still so?
>
> The CL package is unclean w.r.t to its use of the namespace. Using its
> macros is tolerated because it only imposes this namespace mess during
> byte-compilation of your package, but using its functions imposes the
> mess during actual use of your package.
>
> 24.3 finally provides an alternative: `cl-lib' which offers the
> same functionality but in a namespace-clean way (i.e. using a "cl-"
> prefix everywhere).
In case someone is reading this thread, here's what I did in the end:
(require 'cl-lib)
(eval-when-compile
(require 'cl))
Rename all common lisp functions, for example coerce -> cl-coerce. I had
to keep 'cl for macro expansion such as incf.
I removed the following at the end of the fileĀ :
;; Local Variables:
;; byte-compile-warnings: (not cl-functions)
;; End:
Now it compiles without warning.
--
Ivan Kanis
http://ivan.kanis.fr
The essence of science: ask an impertinent question, and you are on
the way to a pertinent answer.
-- Jacob Bronowski
I am listening to "Coldplay - In My Place".
- Re: is requiring cl bad?, (continued)
- Re: is requiring cl bad?, Stefan Monnier, 2012/12/16
- Re: is requiring cl bad?, Pascal J. Bourguignon, 2012/12/17
- Re: is requiring cl bad?, Tony Day, 2012/12/17
- Re: is requiring cl bad?, David De La Harpe Golden, 2012/12/19
- Re: is requiring cl bad?, Ivan Kanis, 2012/12/20
- Re: is requiring cl bad?, Helmut Eller, 2012/12/20
- Re: is requiring cl bad?, David De La Harpe Golden, 2012/12/21
- Re: is requiring cl bad?, Helmut Eller, 2012/12/21
Re: is requiring cl bad?,
Ivan Kanis <=