Can we give up :INTERACTIVE I/O for RUN-PROGRAM?
rpgoldman at sift.net
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