[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: vanroggen%aitg.DEC@decwrl.dec.com
- Subject: Issue: PACKAGE-CLUTTER
- From: David A. Moon <Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Date: Wed, 14 Sep 88 12:32 EDT
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
- In-reply-to: <8809141446.AA04055@decwrl.dec.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 88 07:46:51 PDT
I think this issue also needs to address the default value for :USEd
packages. (Or else the name should be changed to something more
specific like LISP-PACKAGE-CONTENTS.)
If we allow the default value for :USE to be implementation dependent,
I think users would be most happy. If someone really wants just Common
Lisp, they would be able to say :USE '("LISP"). Otherwise they would
be able to get the same environment that the USER package has, since
implementations would have the flexibility to make them the same and
as rich as they would like to make them.
I think this is what resulted from those CL discussions a few years ago.
I'd guess that this is also what several implementations do. Anyone
care to comment?
Symbolics defaults :USE the way CLtL specifies, that is, to just the
LISP package. I'm really not sure that I agree with you that the
default should be changed. A program that wants a specific set of
implementation dependent extensions really ought to ask for them by name
[i.e. (make-package 'foo :use '(gulf-and-western-common-lisp))] so it
can be sure of what it's getting. A program that wants the same
extensions as the user package can do so [i.e. (make-package 'foo
:use (package-use-list (find-package 'user)))].
I'm not sure how much this default matters. I don't think I have ever
seen a defpackage that didn't specify :use explicitly.