Fwd: why is usocket.asd without an in-package or package qualifiers?

[Robert Goldman]

On 6/16/15 Jun 16 -2:08 PM, Faré wrote:
> Robert, should we export load-asd from asdf?

Yes, that sounds right.  I will do so now, unless you want to....

> 
> —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
> If Java had true garbage collection, most programs would delete themselves
> upon execution. — Robert Sewell
> 
> 
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Mark H. David <mhd at yv.org>
> Date: Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 3:05 PM
> Subject: Re: why is usocket.asd without an in-package or package qualifiers?
> To: Zach Beane <xach at xach.com>
> Cc: usocket development <usocket-devel at common-lisp.net>
> 
> 
> Well, ASDF doc (here:
> https://common-lisp.net/project/asdf/asdf/The-defsystem-form.html) is
> not that clear about this. It shows an example .asd file, which does
> have an in-package, albeit to package asdf-user, and says of it:
> 
> The file starts with an in-package form for package asdf-user. Quick
> summary: just do this, because it helps make interactive development
> of defsystem forms behave in the same was as when these forms are
> loaded by ASDF. ... The in-package form will ensure that the system
> definition is read the same as within ASDF when you load it
> interactively with cl:load. However, we recommend that you load .asd
> files through function asdf::load-asd rather than through cl:load, in
> which case this form is unnecessary.
> 
> Don't mean to hijack usocket for ASDF complaints, but shouldn't
> asdf::load-asd be exported?
> 
> Thanks,
> Mark
> 
> 
> ----- Original message -----
> From: Zach Beane <xach at xach.com>
> To: "Mark H. David" <mhd at yv.org>
> Cc: usocket development <usocket-devel at common-lisp.net>
> Subject: Re: why is usocket.asd without an in-package or package qualifiers?
> Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 14:54:36 -0400
> 
> ASDF establishes a particular environment when using asdf:find-system
> and asdf:load-system that is not duplicated by a plain CL:LOAD. It has
> always been this way. You cannot reliably use CL:LOAD to load a system
> file and have things work.
> 
> Zach
> 
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Mark H. David <mhd at yv.org> wrote:
> 
> I notices there's no in-package or qualifiers present in usocket.asd.
> So you have to, it seems, do (in-package :asdf) or similar before
> loading this file.
> Is there any good reason for this?  I was thinking of fixing this and
> doing a pull request. Anyone against?
> Thanks,
> Mark
>