On Tue, 09 Oct 2012 21:17:22 -0400 Zach Beane <[email protected]> wrote: > The default package use list if :use is not provided is > implementation-defined. SBCL is unique (I think) in using the empty > list. Historically other Lisps had at least the CL package and possibly > others in the default list. > > If you want to have more predictability, provide an explicit :use nil in > make-package or (:use) in defpackage.
Indeed, thanks for the confirmation. A discussion related to EVAL's lack of environment object support on #lisp reminded me that I wanted to experiment with symbolic sandboxing. Last night (at the time I also posted here) some experimentation showed me that it's not difficult to implement a restricted "safe" evaluator which can validate/convert, compile and funcall user code without a custom interpreter or compiler). Lisp continues to amaze me regularily. -- Matt ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Don't let slow site performance ruin your business. Deploy New Relic APM Deploy New Relic app performance management and know exactly what is happening inside your Ruby, Python, PHP, Java, and .NET app Try New Relic at no cost today and get our sweet Data Nerd shirt too! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Ecls-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ecls-list
