MS> Note that I'm not (not at all!) arguing against the change, I'm MS> just trying to clarify that it has a cost. I believe that this cost is very, very high. Again, not necessarily for my code or the one shipped currently with XEmacs or which is in the LCD. But hey, there are certainly TONS of old Elisp around - who are we, that we can say "Hey, guy, revise your old stuff !" ? I believe that such a change would not help the acceptability of XEmacs, instead it would be a big hurt for all users out there that use such code. A related issue: I thought, okay, then let's support old ELisp and new-<lisp-flavour-here>-Elisp. But now, I do not see an elegant solution to this either: how would one determine whether <foo>.el is programmed in Elisp or in Scheme\\|CL ? With an (require 'cl) ? And if it is not present, than assume its old-style Elisp ? Holger -- --- http://www.coling.uni-freiburg.de/~schauer --- "Deine capslock und '!' Tasten klemmen." "Nee, ich habe eine Win95 Tastatur." -- Robin Socha und H.Wulff in de.comp.os.linux.misc