Hi Thorsten, > one question with regards to this topic: > what would be the advantage of namespaces in Picolisp over > namingconventions like in Emacs Lisp?
Right. Not much. > 'gnus-function-name' for all functions in gnus library > 'dired-function-name' for all functions in dired library etc Yes. Such conventions make things transparent. The drawback might just be readability of the longish symbol names. I suggested something like this in my reply to Henrik (on Sep 5th, using the 'dot' as a delimiter): > A call like > > (foo> '+Pckg <arg>) > > is in no regard more encapsulating the namespace then > > (foo.Pckg <arg>) Cheers, - Alex -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:email@example.com?subject=Unsubscribe