Re: is requiring cl bad?

[Ivan Kanis]

David De La Harpe Golden <address@hidden> wrote:

> On 17/12/12 19:09, Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote:
>>> 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).
>>
>> This is a silly solution.
>> The right solution is to implement a package system.
>>
> If emacs ever did go toward adding new facilities in the general area
> of modularity (however unlikely it is in reality in the near future),

Sounds like a good candidate for emacs 25. Someone complained we didn't
have a roadmap... ;)

> I reckon Ron Garret's common lisp land "lexicons" work [1]

Thanks for the link, I will read it later.
-- 
Ivan Kanis
http://ivan.kanis.fr

Temporary routing anomaly.
    -- BOFH excuse number 35