[Ecls-list] ASDF revolt
Pascal J. Bourguignon
pjb at informatimago.com
Mon Apr 12 15:32:03 UTC 2010
james anderson <james.anderson at setf.de> writes:
> On 2010-04-11, at 23:29 , Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote:
>> 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
> you may need to do that for some purposes, but the requirement is not
> were one to set the "simplify" goal as dominant, then programs with
> undeclared package cross references would be excluded.
> the statement was not that it is possible to build all lisp programs.
> and one also needs a file system, and the source files, and a
> protocol to impute designators to the elements of the package
> definitions and another to resolve designators to files, but that
> goes without saying.
IMO, qualified symbols are too useful to be done without. And it seems
I'm not alone, over the 1131 lisp source files in libcl-2009-10-27-beta,
there are 630 files containing qualified symbols. Sorry I just assumed
it was going without saying.
More information about the ecl-devel