RE: Working Around for cl-count

[Drew Adams]

> > So instead of fixing this at the source-code level, with 
> > just a few chars of Lisp, you try to solve the problem at
> > the distribution level: "Just use GNU ELPA".
> > Have hammer, will see nails...
> 
> I just proposed an alternate route.  Depending on the
> circumstances it might be a good idea, or not.
> 
> If you find it entertaining to push the idea far enough that it
> becomes absurd, all the more power to you,

Actually, the reply you quote from me was to a different proposal from yours.
So you're off-base here.

You did not propose that the OP publish his code on GNU ELPA and add a
dependency on `cl-lib' at that level.  You proposed telling the OP's users to
download `cl-lib' themselves and include it in their own `load-path' values.

And where is the exaggeration in what I wrote?  Isn't that just what Dmitry's
suggestion was: for the OP to distribute his code on GNU ELPA, where it could
reference `cl-lib'?

And no, I am not trying to entertain anyone.  I truly believe that a local
source-code change that adds only a few chars is a better solution, in general,
than either (a) telling the OP's users to download and reference `cl-lib'
themselves (your proposal) or (b) uploading the OP's code to GNU ELPA and
pointing it to `cl-lib' (Dmitry's proposal).

We can agree to disagree, but let's please assume that we each believe that our
suggestion has some merit and might help - alternate routes, as you say.