[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: Sean.Engelson@cad.cs.cmu.edu, common-lisp@SU-AI.ARPA
- Subject: Packages
- From: Soley@MIT-XX.ARPA
- Date: Mon, 1 Dec 86 16:25 EST
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 1 Dec 1986 15:34-EST
This idea has probably been brought up before, but as a solution to the
'packages problem', without really any loos of functionality, I propose
the following: To have symbols be universal, but their values and
function definitions (maybe extended to all properties) be
package-tied. Thus symbols are symbols and are EQ to each other in all
the expectable cases, etc.., but we have the functionality of differing
name spaces. This could be implemented by having a PACKAGE 'property'
attached to different values of a symbol's property..
Pardon, but let me be the first to barf. Blech.
Are you saying that (eql #'FOO:QUUX #'BAR:QUUX) => NIL, but
(eql 'FOO:QUUX 'BAR:QUUX) => T ??
First (to say it politely) I don't see how your solution solves
anything. Second, the more obvious solution of making
(EQL 'FOO:QUUX 'BAR:QUUX) => T is (1) uneconomical, and (2) unteachable
in the presence of (eql #'FOO:QUUX #'BAR:QUUX) => NIL.
I don't think there's really a problem, and, if there is, I don't think
this solves it. (Sorry for the legal reasoning in that sentence).
-- Richard Soley
- From: Sean.Engelson@cad.cs.cmu.edu