Re: reason for having separate package.lisp?

budden <budden-lisp@xxxxxxx> writes:

Hi list,
I wonder why package.lisp in asdf systems is a separate file? Is it
required for portability due to some bugs in some of implementations
or is there some other reason? I'd like to have defpackage form inside
the source file sometimes. This way it is easier to achieve
modularity.

I usually agree with you. For simple projects.

However, you may have packages big enough that you want to implement
them in several source files. In this case, it's better to put the
defpackage in a separate file.

Or you may have a graph of dependencies between the packages that is
not a D.A.G, and therefore it would be difficult to load the files in
the right order. In this case too it's better to put the defpackage
forms in a separate file.


--
__Pascal Bourguignon__
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Fortran 77 alphabet character $
    ... but often prevelent parameter/argument mappings. ... Are caller and callee in same source file? ... Perhaps you could break it up - each subprogram in a separate file, ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: ISampleGrabber
    ... >> I seem to be having a problem getting the NullRenderer to compile, ... >> separate file?? ... > source file that uses qedit.h and the rest of my source files use the D3D ...
    (microsoft.public.win32.programmer.directx.video)
  • Re: ISampleGrabber
    ... > by any chance post the code that you took out of qedit.h and put in a ... > separate file?? ... > I seem to be either missing something or I have just got it wrong.. ... source file that uses qedit.h and the rest of my source files use the D3D ...
    (microsoft.public.win32.programmer.directx.video)