[asdf-devel] Logical pathnames....

[Pascal J. Bourguignon]

Robert Goldman <rpgoldman at sift.info> writes:

> FWIW, I am just working on a project that has some CL people and some
> non-CL people.  The fact that pathnames with underscores (that C
> programmers, e.g., are fond of) break decoding when they appear in
> logical pathnames is a real stinker.
>
> This alone is almost enough to rule out of court the use of logical
> pathnames, IMO....

Logical pathnames are not made to represent physical pathnames.  For
this, there are physical pathnames.

However, you can map logical pathnames to physical pathnames, with
logical pathname translations.

But obviously, pathnames provided by users won't be logical pathnames:
logical pathnames are meaningless to users.  Users only know physical
pathnames.  Logical pathnames are not designed to be used by user, but
by programmers, to shield programmers from the idiosyncrasies of user
pathnames.


But then, ASDF is not used by users, but by programmers.
Therefore there's no incompatibility between ASDF and logical pathnames.


-- 
__Pascal Bourguignon__                     http://www.informatimago.com/
A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.