Re: newbie: Emacs require cl - other Lisps

Didier Verna wrote:

Emacs Lisp is used to program Emacs, but it is different from Common
Lisp. The cl *emacs* package provides Common Lisp idioms for Emacs Lisp.

Errr, OK.

So, on the comp.lang.lisp group, many of the examples or discussions
showing Lisp code are in-effect examples in Emacs Lisp, (which, as luck
would have it, are transparent to Common Lisp and the other Lisps).

Maybe I understand that the *implementation-specific* examples, which may
depart sufficiently from Emacs Lisp, are rare enough to warrant a special
mention ?

So, is the function package prefix still 'good-house-keeping' ? Or just for
the exceptions ? Indeed I can't seem to find it in the Hyperspec - I'll
keep looking.


.

Relevant Pages

  • modules vs. packages
    ... > module system of the underlying lisp. ... Common Lisp does have a trivial feature called modules. ... is that it has a unique name (with respect to its home package). ... the system version control and release and patching features. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Common Lisp and RegressionTesting
    ... And I did: from these posts, ... deleting the package in general or unbinding the symbol- ... I want to make it clear that I do not blame Lisp for how it works. ... Common Lisp is doing in the world). ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: newbie: Emacs require cl - other Lisps
    ... the exact package from which they originate? ... Where the Emacs manual says " ... ... you're still using a subset of Common Lisp. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: The Fundamental Confusion of Xah
    ... this time with no less honour than the "Number One Common Lisp ... Xah misinterprets Stallman's use of "hacker" ... be more at home in a group that discusses Emacs Lisp. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Syntax for :
    ... >in Allegro CL (and, I'm told, as legacy behavior in Lisp ... >is not the current package, ... I always thought that that syntax should be part of Common Lisp. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)