[asdf-devel] never ending component relative pathnames [2]

[james anderson]

On 2010-03-10, at 04:46 , Faré wrote:

>>> [ ... ]
>>
> I'd vote against this rule you propose, because
>
> 1- I am in charge of building a large system, where some components
> have names such as foo-V1.1/ or bar/baz-V1.200.lisp that reflect the
> fact that we must deal with compatibility with various versioned
> protocols. I'd rather not go back to having to magically generate
> pathnames for them when portable names were previously possible.
>
> 2- for backwards compatibility with existing system files, the type
> must be optional.
>
> 3- for aesthetic reasons, I find that it's nicer if I don't have to
> mysteriously do "bar/baz" but "bar/baz-V1.200.lisp". I feel that the
> rule ".lisp is always added to the filename" is simpler and easier for
> newcomers to understand than the rule ".lisp is added to the filename
> iff there isn't a dot in the name already".

checking my comprehension: this paragraph describes the way a string  
value for :pathname is handled.
this does not happen if the argument is a pathname.
?