11:29:54XachIt's certainly possible that closer-mop is unsuitable for some reason but portability is a goal and if it falls short some context would be useful.
11:30:14NilbySorry. I'm not trying to stir up trouble.
11:30:37cl-arthura non-portable portability/conformance library would be a nice paradox
11:34:05Nilbyportability.cl does report closer-mop favoribly
11:34:56jackdanielportability libraries are not "universally" portable by definition, because their purpose is to span multiple implementations (so each implementation is special-cased)
11:35:45jackdanielstill, they are far more portable than implementation-specific package; also they usually leave door open for adding support for new implementations by providing convenient api
11:35:58NilbyIf ½ my code was ½ as portable I might be ½ way there.