From ...
From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no>
Subject: Re: getting a full symbol name
Date: 2000/04/27
Message-ID: <3165868104954676@naggum.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 616564142
References: <5174E9F018ADFCCC.F6B53EE0A06D6DC9.5CE6E22D206AE3C2@lp.airnews.net> <3165125191606936@naggum.no> <863doh4v0t.fsf@g.local> <86hfcni2zq.fsf@g.local> <rB3O4.60$xb5.1783@burlma1-snr2>
mail-copies-to: never
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@eunet.no
X-Trace: oslo-nntp.eunet.no 956879406 24015 195.0.192.66 (27 Apr 2000 23:50:06 GMT)
Organization: Naggum Software; vox: +47 8800 8879; fax: +47 8800 8601; http://www.naggum.no
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0803 (Gnus v5.8.3) Emacs/20.5
Mime-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: 27 Apr 2000 23:50:06 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp

* Barry Margolin <barmar@genuity.net>
| Why complicate things to accomodate something that no sensible
| person would do?

  well, thank you.  maybe some sensible person saw that it would be a
  waste to create a dummy package to have symbols always print with a
  package qualifier?

  the answer is, of course: to get it right, always.

| Does it really matter if keywords don't display as expected after
| doing (in-package :keyword)?

  yes.  this is Common Lisp, not Java or C++ or Perl.  remember?

#:Erik