I wonder how difficult it would be to introduce rudimentary namespaces into #elisp.

#emacs

@me probably not that hard, but it’s a dead end because the powers that be hate the idea (and everything even remotely related to Common Lisp).
@me
M-x list-packages M-x occur namespace yields names, namespaces and with-namespaces as current implementations of namespaces for elisp.
@galdor

@screwtape @me
Oh come on you understand the situation perfectly ;) You can write hacks to make it look like there are namespaces, but at the end of the day, they are just hacks.

There has been multiple discussions about it on emacs-devel, and there is no way to get elisp out of the dark ages until the usual suspects are replaced. Which is not happening any time soon.

@galdor
jlamothe did say the words introducing rudimentary...!

By the way, should I interview you ("interview") some time?
@me

@screwtape @galdor If you think I'd actually have anything interesting to say. I feel I can't really hold a candle to some of your previous guests. I'm just aimlessly noodling around with stuff.

@me
You know I like to set an extremely low bar for quality personally. And after all, everyone eats at your sushi place every week...!

It's also interesting to everyone to get opinions on common lisp from the outside or somewhat recent arrivals. I think you and jeremy_list are both interesting as sort of Haskell/MOO/emacs/common lispers.

Counterpointing the "golang for serious business" long-time lisp-heads like @galdor