[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Common LISP Registrar
- To: David C. Plummer in disguise <DCP@SCRC-QUABBIN.ARPA>
- Subject: Common LISP Registrar
- From: Robert W. Kerns <RWK@SCRC-YUKON.ARPA>
- Date: Thu, 20 Jun 85 13:06 EDT
- Cc: greek@DEC-HUDSON.ARPA, common-lisp@SU-AI.ARPA
- In-reply-to: <850620095809.9.NFEP@NEPONSET.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 85 09:58 EDT
From: David C. Plummer in disguise <DCP@SCRC-QUABBIN.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 85 09:44:55 EDT
Since I haven't gotten any response to my offer to be Common LISP
registrar, I assume people are either vastly disinterested or not
sure what I mean. Is there enough interest that I should write up
a little proposal and send it around? The proposal would describe
what registration meant and suggest a few policies therefor.
If there is going to be the possibility of global name conflicts, at
least one registrar is needed. Are you volunteering to be the N
registrars for the N possible conflicts? Some subset of N? Or
specifically the case that seems to have brought this up: The registry
Humurous (?) suggestion: Be the Registrar of Common Lisp Naming Registrars.
More seriously, I think it's important that we consider registries as
a (mostly compatible) change in the semantics of the language.
Don't take that to mean I think it's a bad idea, however. If we're going
to do it, we should do it right, and document it, consider its impact, and
possibly make other changes in light of that. We may wish to provide ways
that users can choose names guarenteed not to conflict with any registered
name. For example #+FOO vs #+PRIVATE:FOO. (I don't know if this case
example solves a real problem).
I don't think this is hard or much work, so long as we recognize
that it IS a change.