Re: Cleaning up the EIEIO namespace
Vitalie Spinu <[email protected]> Fri, 29 Mar 2013 11:04:33 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.eieio |
|---|---|
| Organization | EUR |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
>> Stefan Monnier <[email protected]> >> on Thu, 14 Feb 2013 17:16:21 -0500 wrote: >>> Actually, there's a misunderstanding here: >>> - setf was indeed part of CL, but being a macro it was accepted >>> (i.e. you don't need to have it defined at run-time, since it's >>> macro-expanded during compilation). >>> - setf is part of core Elisp in Emacs-24.3. >>> So maybe we don't need oref/oset at all. >> Yes, although I like "(oset foo bar 'baz)" much better than the verbose >> (setf (cl-slot-value foo 'bar) 'baz) >> But I can understand that you want to get rid of it, and package writers >> can still define their own macros/accessors. > I actually don't particular care if we keep them or not, except that if > we keep them, we need to give them a prefix. Could please eieio-oref/eieio-oset be avoided? oref/oset are so often used that people will start aliasing them anyways. How about replacing eieio-, the most awkward prefix in existence, with simple "eo-", standing for Emacs Objects? Then eoref/eoset can be used as (almost) namespace clean alternatives. Vitalie