[implementations-list] GNU Emacs policy that says packages must not use cl.el at runtime (was: viper-in-more-modes still needs ...)

Jason Spiro jasonspiro3 at gmail.com
Tue Feb 9 07:42:13 CET 2010

On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 9:58 PM, Stephen Bach <sjbach at sjbach.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 02, 2010 at 10:40:10PM -0500, Jason Spiro wrote:
>> >  3. GNU Emacs enforces the backward policy that packages must not use
>> >     cl.el Common Lisp extensions at runtime.  This kind of restriction
>> >     is another enemy to development momentum; if it's expedient to
>> >     Vegard or another developer to leverage a standard library, they
>> >     should be empowered to do so.
>> But John J. Foerch said in his email of Wed, Oct 3, 2007 at 11:00 PM
>> at http://my-trac.assembla.com/vimpulse/ticket/2 that there are cl.el
>> macros that override core Emacs functions.  Do you still stand by your
>> assertion?
> Yes.  cl.el's version of push subsumes GNU Emacs' standard push - it's
> not dangerous.  Almost anyone who uses Emacs extensively will load cl.el
> as part of their configuration.  XEmacs loads it by default.

What reason does the GNU Emacs team give for this policy?  If it turns
out to be a flimsy reason, then perhaps you or Vegard could get the
policy changed if you wanted to.  :)

More information about the implementations-list mailing list