[asdf-devel] Tutorial ASDF(?)

[Faré]

>> Historical reasons: .asd files are meant to only contain simple stuff,
>
> Not that this really matters, but ... this is not so.
>
> .asd files have always been meant to contains things like custom
> component definitions and defmethods for them -- not "just simple
> stuff". Historically speaking compiling .asd files used to work fine,
> assuming they set up their packages right -- which is one of the major
> reasons for the
>
> (defpackage :foo-system ...)
>
> (in-package :foo-system)
>
> (defsystem :foo ...)
>
> pattern one sometimes sees. Not sure if it is still expected to work.
>
It is still expected to work, and it is actually recommended if you're
defining any ASDF extension: classes, methods, even just functions,
that may have to be redefined, debugged, traced, or otherwise named.

I wonder if ASDF shouldn't just define a ASDF-USER package that uses
ASDF and CL, instead of creating temporary packages every time.

—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
"Ask not what the government can do for you. Ask what the government is doing
to you." — David Friedman, "The Machinery of Freedom", p. 21