RE: Generators (iterators) for Gnu Emacs

[Drew Adams]

> The entire Common Lisp ecosystem is a counterexample so your rather
> sweeping declaration. In practice, namespaces are rather useful
> despite the need to *sometimes* fully *some* symbols. It's still
> better than having to fully specify *every* symbol on *every* use.

That was my experience also.

> > In practice, you have to write the package prefix whenever you
> > refer to a symbol that has one.  It might as well be part of the
> > symbol name itself.  Thus, packages complicate the language
> > definition while providing no benefit.
> 
> There's a lot of Lisp code out there that uses packages in the way
> they were meant to be used, and your personal distaste for the
> mechanism shouldn't keep namespaces out of elisp.

I wonder whether perhaps Richard ran into the need to use prefixes
so much because he was implementing the CL package system, and not
just making normal use of it.  Just a conjecture.