Re: adding namespaces to emacs-lisp (better elisp?)

[Lars Brinkhoff]

Stefan Monnier wrote:
> Sounds like CL's approach requires symbols to be present in several
> packages, which might require more changes than I'd like in the way
> obarrays and symbols work.

When I did my implementation of CL packages, I did consider using
obarrays for the symbol table.  But as you say, they are not quite
suitable for that because a symbol may have to be interned in more
than one package.  Whereas an Emacs symbol may only be intered in one
obarray.  Or so I vaguely recall.

Like I wrote before, I'm ready to "port" my code to a be a proper part
of Emacs, but not if it's considered a no-go from the start.