Re: is requiring cl bad?

[Pascal J. Bourguignon]

Xue Fuqiao <address@hidden> writes:

> On Sun, 16 Dec 2012 10:29:30 +0100
> Ivan Kanis <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> I was under the impression that requiring cl was bad (TM). I can't
>> remember why. Is it still so?
>
> You can see these pages:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2003-08/msg00436.html
> http://www.gnu.org/gnu/rms-lisp.html
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-09/msg01472.html
>
> BTW, what does "TM" mean(English is not my native language)?

It should be written as: ™  meaning Trade Mark, meaning "cl is bad" is a
registered trade mark.  No it's not, but it's as famous as if it was.

-- 
__Pascal Bourguignon__                     http://www.informatimago.com/
A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.