Re: Why :USE sucks in the Common Lisp package system

[phoe]

Thanks for the welcome.

On 09.05.2020 23:47, João Távora wrote:

But don't _you_ ever use :USE it for packages that you _do_ have

control over?  Like an internal utils package?  Or a test package

that uses the package under testing?  Otherwise I agree with you

about the ":USE abuse". 

Of course I do! I've mentioned in my earlier mail,

> or a combination of packages that do not change and we have full control over so we can manually see and resolve the symbol conflicts as they arise

Perhaps that wasn't clear enough from me: I meant that it is fine to :USE packages that are known to not change and to :USE packages that we fully control, such as internal util packages that you mention; and it is fine to combine using the two within a single package.

I actually disagree when it comes to :USE-ing packages under test; I think that they should be tested via their fully qualified name, or local nickname.

~phoe