Can we give up :INTERACTIVE I/O for RUN-PROGRAM?

Robert Goldman rpgoldman at
Thu Nov 3 15:18:41 UTC 2016

Interactive I/O is not reliable across implementations, and is also
difficult to test.

Do we really need to support this?  If you, as a programmer, really want
interactive I/O, you should probably write your own wrapper to manage
I/O to the program.  Some enterprising soul could even write a clone of
"expect" for CL.

I'd rather lose the :interactive option, than have it and have it work

So I'm soliciting comments -- particularly from those who think we
should keep it.

It seems like some people also have a means to search Quicklisp to
screen suggestions like this.  I'd also welcome feedback based on
libraries in QL.


More information about the asdf-devel mailing list