Re: CL package serious deficiencies

[Lennart Borgman]

On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 00:52, Nix <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 7 Feb 2012, Stefan Monnier said:
>
>>> I've never understood what's wrong with including cl.el, nor why the
>>
>> The main issue is namespace.  If someone goes through the code to rename
>> it all to "cl-*", then we won't need to avoid using it.
>
> Aha. I'd agree with *that*: it's always been hellishly unclear which
> things are in cl or not. Its intention to sort of add to the Emacs Lisp
> core with things with very similar names was perhaps praiseworthy, but
> once those things started to move *into* the non-cl.el core, often with
> subtly different semantics, it just got fearfully confusing.
>
> For compatibility reasons I suspect we need to put the renamed versions
> in something new ('cl-dumped', say, or 'cl-clean'), and have the old
> cl.el versions become defaliases to them. (The Emacs core's uses of cl
> can be fixed up, but cl is widely used in third-party modules, so we
> can't just drop those names.)

But we can have the same policy as now regarding the use of the old
names for things in cl.el.