Re: un-deprecating CL

[David O'Toole]

Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:

> It is added complexity that we don't need.  To add them to standard
> Emacs Lisp functions would call for documenting them with great
> importance. 

But defcustom, make-hash-table, define-derived-mode,
make-network-process, etc all use keyword arguments as far as I can
tell. 

It isn't clear to me what you mean by "documenting them with great
importance."

> It is one thing to have `function*' and `defun*' in a compatibility
> package.  It is quite another to give them legitimacy in Emacs Lisp.

For whatever it's worth, I would not describe CL as a compatibility
package. The manual's overview says that it is designed to make Emacs
Lisp programming more convenient. (The part on porting Common Lisp
code is Appendix D.)

-- 
David O'Toole 
address@hidden
http://dto.freeshell.org/notebook/