On 1/26/13 Jan 26 -6:12 PM, Faré wrote:
I think the whole "temporary package" thing is a failure, and we should just have an ASDF-USER package that uses ASDF.
Does anyone have any objection to having .asd files be loaded in a shared ASDF-USER rather than a temporary ASDF~D package?
If you want to define your own private functions in their private namespace, there's defpackage for you.
I am sympathetic to your concerns here, but I am worried that it will cause lots of breakage.
I have always done the old-school thing and defined a new package for my system definition. This makes for a pleasing symmetry between behavior where I incrementally evaluate forms, and when I load the system into an image.
*HOWEVER*, some CL pundits seem to think that making extra packages is bad, and in a spirit of (to me, misguided) parsimony, strongly encouraged people to rely on the creation of the temporary packages.
I fear that this means that loading all the package definitions into a single ASDF-USER package is likely to cause breakage from namespace collisions.
Also, I fear that this will be a nuisance to catch in testing, because it is likely to require testing large numbers of *combinations* of loaded systems to simulate behavior downstream programmers might see.
In my customary role as backward compatibility buzz-kill, I suggest that we keep the old behavior.
Best, r