[cdr-discuss] [CDR 2] What's the package?

[Pascal Costanza]

Hi,

[I am posting this as a regular Common Lisper, not as a CDR editor.]

The specification of generic hash tables misses a specification of  
the package in which the functionality is to be found. The reference  
implementation defines a package net.hexapodia.hashtables with a  
nickname genhash. This should, IMHO, be part of the specification.  
Otherwise, we get into the situation as with the CLOS MOP, where each  
implementation uses its own package name for some semi-standard  
library. (This is admittedly not a serious issue, but it is  
inconvenient nonetheless.)

On a more general note: Do we need a more general mechanism for  
assigning package names? One potential problem I see coming up is  
that each CDR uses its own package name, which could lead to a  
proliferation of package names which in turn is also quite inconvenient.

Do we need a common CDR package for collecting different CDR  
proposals? This might be impractical as well because we  
(intentionally) do not have a way to approve CDRs. How would we avoid  
name clashes across different CDRs?

Any ideas?


Pascal

-- 
Pascal Costanza, mailto:pc at p-cos.net, http://p-cos.net
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Programming Technology Lab
Pleinlaan 2, B-1050 Brussel, Belgium