Re: CL package serious deficiencies

[Lennart Borgman]

On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 03:13, Stephen J. Turnbull <address@hidden> wrote:
> Nix writes:
>  > 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.
>
> Oh, s**t.  *We* do *not* agree, since we're moving in the direction of
> exact Common Lisp conformance for the subset of features we provide (I
> think Aidan has the intention of reducing cl.el to
>
>    ;;; cl --- Common Lisp emulation for Emacsen
>    (provide 'cl)
>    ;;; end of cl.el
>
> in the near future).
>
> Not that anybody on this list *should* care about that, but just in
> case.... ;-)

This reminds me that the help functions does not work for cl things. A
serious attempt to make those functions useful should probably fix
that too.