Package extensions usage

[Kenneth Tilton]

The late Dan Weinreb's mileage was a lot different, mind you:
http://xach.livejournal.com/278815.html

I just go completely the other way, preferring mx-what-ever to mx:what-ever
by a mile.

-kt

On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 12:05 PM, Michael J. Forster <mike at sharedlogic.ca>
wrote:

> On 29 December 2015 at 19:25, Pascal Costanza <pc at p-cos.net> wrote:
> > Hi,
> [...]
> >
> > Also, I agree with Kenny
> > that splitting libraries into too fine-grained small little packages is
> not
> > a good recipe for organizing your projects. Lisp packages want to be big,
> > and there is no major disadvantage in doing so, and I fear that
> hierarchical
> > package names encourage unnecessary fine-grained splitting. That just
> > creates visibility problems, and distract from solving /actual/ problems.
> [...]
>
> On a related note, I attempted to retrofit a 150K+ LOC application
> with "inferred packages"[1] and, revision time and effort aside, I
> think the only dependency problem it solved was the one it created. I
> have not tried it with a larger or smaller application, and, of
> course, YMMV.
>
> Mike
>
>
> [1]
> http://davazp.net/2014/11/26/modern-library-with-asdf-and-package-inferred-system.html
>
>


-- 
Kenneth Tilton
54 Isle of Venice Dr
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301

ken at tiltontec.com
http://tiltontec.com
@tiltonsalgebra

646-269-1077

"In a class by itself." *-Macworld*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.common-lisp.net/pipermail/pro/attachments/20151230/29b265d1/attachment.html>