Subject: Re: Packages From: Erik Naggum <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 08:56:02 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <email@example.com> * Bruce Hoult <firstname.lastname@example.org> | I've followed your examples but I don't see any such problem. Most people do not see problems until they have actually experienced them. It can take a genius to see a previously non-existing problem. (And a madman to see problems that remain non-existing.) This alone is sufficient to tell people who "do not see the problem" that maybe they should not argue that it does not exist, but instead ask how people first ran into it. I think this has been much more than adequately explained by Kent, whose tremendously impressive patience I am not sure whether I admire or consider a waste of his time, so it simply means that Common Lisp solves a problem that most people will _never_ be aware of, will therefore not think about, and therefore needs precisely the kind of solution that Common Lisp offers intuitively and non-intrusively. So the more you do not see the problem, but consider it smart to go with the flow instead of refusing to listen to people who have both experienced the problem and figured out a solution that you do not have to think about, the more likely you are not to run into the problem, ever. The larger the number of people who cannot figure out what problem packages solves, the more successful the concept and its implementation is. /// -- In a fight against something, the fight has value, victory has none. In a fight for something, the fight is a loss, victory merely relief.