26 Apr
2011
26 Apr
'11
11:39 a.m.
On 26 April 2011 14:31, Didier Verna <didier@lrde.epita.fr> wrote:
Yeah. This is something one needs to do in several occasions already (for instance to get MOP functions from packages named differently across implementations) and I don't think it's such a big deal.
Unless you use CLOSER-MOP. :) I think a semi-standard package for extensions like this would be good, but that's probably just my idealism speaking. Cheers, -- Nikodemus