Another follow-up from yesterday's doc reviews

[Stelian Ionescu]

On Thu, 2016-09-22 at 14:04 -0500, Robert Goldman wrote:
> On 9/22/16 Sep 22 -1:56 PM, Stelian Ionescu wrote:
> > > The comments in the file say that we *must* use load-asdf to load
> > > a
> > > .asd file, but not *WHY* we must do so.
> > > 
> > > Why is this necessary?
> > 
> > Because asdf:load-asdf sets up the correct evaluation environment,
> > including setting the correct *package*.
> > 
> 
> OK, again, if this is required, why don't we ENFORCE it?

Because in some specific cases it could be made to work without it (all
ASDF symbols package-prefixed, etc...) and some old-timers complained
that we're breaking their dev workflow if we make it impossible to
reload an .asd using C-c C-c or cl:load

-- 
Stelian Ionescu a.k.a. fe[nl]ix
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://mailman.common-lisp.net/pipermail/asdf-devel/attachments/20160922/799f2cfe/attachment.sig>