[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Next browser finally on master!
From: |
Ricardo Wurmus |
Subject: |
Re: Next browser finally on master! |
Date: |
Wed, 19 Dec 2018 22:45:00 +0100 |
User-agent: |
mu4e 1.0; emacs 26.1 |
Pierre Neidhardt <address@hidden> writes:
> - As far as I understand, the compiler *does* change the resulting
> binary, thus the resulting REPL experience will be different, because
> all Lisps are different beyond the ANSI standard and other undefined
> behaviour. In other words, connecting via SLIME to ccl-next or
> sbcl-next would result in a different environment.
Sure. I wouldn’t expect people who use ECL to be able to load libraries
that were built with SBCL.
>> That these packages can *also* be used as libraries does not mean that the
>> packages should have names with the “sbcl-” or “cl-” or “other-lisp-” prefix.
>
> That would not be consistent with the Lisp library naming scheme then.
> And it raises the question as to why we have bothered with the sbcl- and
> ecl- prefixes so far.
The naming scheme applies to packages that are primarily used as
libraries. A package “foo” that is written in Python and also provides
modules that can be imported in an interactive Python session will not
be named “python-foo” when it is primarily used on its own.
--
Ricardo
- Re: Next browser finally on master!, (continued)
Re: Next browser finally on master!, Ludovic Courtès, 2018/12/19
- Re: Next browser finally on master!, Brett Gilio, 2018/12/19
- Re: Next browser finally on master!, Ricardo Wurmus, 2018/12/19
- Re: Next browser finally on master!, Brett Gilio, 2018/12/19
- Re: Next browser finally on master!, Pierre Neidhardt, 2018/12/19
- Re: Next browser finally on master!,
Ricardo Wurmus <=
- Re: Next browser finally on master!, Brett Gilio, 2018/12/19
- Re: Next browser finally on master!, Pierre Neidhardt, 2018/12/19
Re: Next browser finally on master!, Brett Gilio, 2018/12/19