[Ecls-list] ASDF revolt

[Pascal J. Bourguignon]

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
>>>>> programs.
> [...]
> you may need to do that for some purposes, but the requirement is not  
> universal.
> 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.

-- 
__Pascal Bourguignon__