Christian Lynbech <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have some sympathy for the sentiment that adding `in-package' forms
> when you kind of don't care is silly. This is after all lisp, not Java
> or Erlang. The "packages.lisp" file just want to create packages for
> cl-regex and thus is rather safe, it is just that ASDF goes out of its
> way to break it.
load makes no guarantees about the value of *package* (only that it is
rebound). i have had situations in my code were (in-package :bar)
failed because *package* didn't use :common-lisp, i was doing some
really weird stuff, but still.
technically you should always start any file with:
(cl:in-package ...)
or at least use cl:defpackage in packages.lisp. i (for what it's
worth) don't have much sympathy for files which don't specify what
package they want, they didn't get what they didn't ask for. and
technical issuse aside, we're only talking about one line anyway.
--
-Marco
Ring the bells that still can ring.
Forget the perfect offering.
There is a crack in everything.
That's how the light gets in.
-Leonard Cohen
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
