Package-local nicknames always seem to me like a good idea, and I expect that if I ever built something really large in CL they would sooner or later become invaluable, but I have to confess that the number of times I can recall actually using them is on the order of once or twice.
I don't think I've ever used hierarchical packages, though I used to use Allegro all the time. But I have no objection if other people want to use them (as long as I can define local nicknames for them). Broadly, I agree that packages can be very large without causing difficulties, as long as a single organization is in control of the entire contents. -- Scott On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Alessio Stalla <alessiosta...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I'd like to run a little poll among experienced Lisp developers. The topic > is the usage in the wild of the extensions to the package system provided > by various implementations. My apologies to people who are subscribed to > the ABCL mailing list, where some time ago I submitted the same questions > getting back several insightful answers but no actual data. > > So, here is how it is. I'm working on a novel idea (I hope) regarding > symbols and packages; I won't go into the details now. It suffices to say > that there is some overlap with features offered by certain Lisp > implementations, namely: > > * package-local nicknames: the ability to specify, for each package, a > list of nicknames for other packages which are in effect only in that > package; available on ABCL and SBCL ( > http://www.sbcl.org/manual/#Package_002dLocal-Nicknames) and possibly > other implementations I'm not aware of. > * "Hierarchical" packages: a naming convention for packages understood by > the reader and a few support functions, which allow to have concise > nicknames for a group of closely related packages, such as > com.foo.mylib.api and com.foo.mylib.implementation. Found natively in > Allegro CL ( > http://franz.com/support/documentation/current/doc/packages.htm) and in > an open-source library by P. Bourguignon. > > My questions: > 1) First and foremost, is anybody actually using those features? What are > you using them for? > 2) If yes, how useful are they for you? What shortcomings do you find in > them? >