Re: {Improved version} EXPORT-IMPORT and the other random commands

[hilfingr%tully.Berkeley.EDU@berkeley.edu (Paul Hilfinger)]

I'm also interested in seeing the "package problem" cleared up.  I
have two questions.

1) Has anyone written a definitive "why CL packages stink" article 
   or message, preferably one that someone regards as definitive?

2) You write

       > ... The underlying idea that you define the package environment
       > by performing a series of side-effects on the package system
       > is so wrong it is beyond repair.  It is so entirely sensitive
       > to complex and obscure order-of-events issues that even if
       > you were successful in getting all implementations to do
       > exactly the same thing, real-life users could not adaquately
       > standardize their workstyles and interactions to avoid
       > problems, even if they could understand all the rules!
       > 
       > I think the time would be better spent on specifying and
       > adopting a DEFPACKAGE macro.  This would always be the first
       > form of the first file loaded.  (Or at least, before any
       > IN-PACKAGE's for that package)....

   Are you saying that this DEFPACKAGE macro would NOT have any side-effects
   on the package system?  How would it have its effect?  Or, more
   generally, what is the underlying idea with which you want to
   replace "side-effects on the package system"?  (Somehow, electronic
   mail adds an unwonted note of harshness to my syntax; that last
   question was meant to be straight, not rhetorical.)

Paul Hilfinger
U. C. Berkeley
Hilfinger@Berkeley.EDU