[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Tuesday 17 June 2003 01:15 pm, Jakub Travnik wrote:
> I have noticed that you choose "brl-when" and not simply
> "when". "when" would be surly more readable. Then I realized it is
> Scheme, lisp1. You have to come up with more obscure identifier not to
> introduce name collisions into existing code. Is that right?

I don't think so. It seems to me this is a question of modularity, not a 
question of lispn-ess. The 'brl-' prefix tells you where does this 
functionality comes from.

> Does that mean that Common Lisp's separate function namespace model
> would have better maintainability and/or readability in such cases
> over Scheme?

No. I think the Common Lisp feature that would help here is the package