6 Sep
2009
6 Sep
'09
6:48 p.m.
Gustavo <gugamilare@gmail.com> writes:
It will not change function or macro names nor create new names or aliases for them in some other package, even if the new names are more descriptive or acceptable.
That seems unnecessarily restrictive. What's wrong with a COMMON-LISP-3 package which has more orthogonal names? Heck, it could even take advantage of some theoretical versioned-package functionality. -- Robert A. Uhl I take great delight at jeering at overly healthy types and telling them that they're going to feel really stupid one day, lying in a bed dying of nothing. --GB