[Ecls-list] ASDF revolt

[Pascal J. Bourguignon]

james anderson <james.anderson at setf.de> writes:

> On 2010-04-11, at 20:19 , Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote:
>
>> james anderson <james.anderson at setf.de> writes:
>>
>>> if the dominant goal is to simplify, it is demonstrated, that there
>>> is sufficient information in package declarations to build lisp
>>> programs.
>>
>>
>> This is wrong.
>
> that you can describe another method says nothing more than that the  
> truth value of the sentence above is qualified.
> but then, it contained no universal and was itself qualified.

Perhaps you meant "system declarations"?

By "package declarations" I understand defpackage forms, and I meant
that it was not enough, since to do what you want, that is, build lisp
programs, you need to add information over the bare defpackage forms.
The proof is in the fact that the defpackage form doesn't list all the
qualified symbols used by the code in that package.

-- 
__Pascal Bourguignon__