On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 3:19 PM, Stelian Ionescu sionescu@cddr.org wrote:
No, have it search for a symbol named (string :foo/file) first in ASDF/EXTENSIONS then ASDF, for backwards-compatibility, then one day only ASDF/EXTENSIONS.
1- Why not just the use existing ASDF/USER rather than a newfangled ASDF/EXTENSIONS ?
2- I understand both points of view, and don't have an opinion — except that whichever way the ASDF maintainer moves, it will take a lot of efforts and a lot of time before you can pull the plug on the current code.
For reference, Clojure also has the convention of prefixing keywords with a "namespace" name (their namespaces are more or less the moral equivalent of CL packages), as in :foo/bar for a keyword bar that declares being owned by foo.
I can also see the point of using the existing CL package conventions. I removed in ASDF3 the old ASDF 1.x trick of having temporary packages ASDF0, ASDF1, etc., for each .asd file being read, instead of a common ASDF-USER and letting people manage their own packages manually. That old didn't actually help with symbol hygiene, and only got in the way, while people still needed to defpackage their own packages for extensions and anything worth clashing.
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org Documentation is worth it just to be able to answer all your mail with 'RTFM'. — Alan Cox