On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 05:59:44PM +0200, Nikodemus Siivola wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 03:57:14PM +0000, Daniel Barlow wrote:
> > (which in the light of this comment seems flawed) was that WHN wanted
> > to keep it. Since this is possibly not the case, who else wants to
> > weigh in here?
> I'm in favor of dropping it. Preferably from a high place.
I think going to a more fundamental and less DWIMish interface is
fine. My only reservation is that I'd like to get the new interface
sufficiently right that we avoid having to rejigger the interface
every 3 months or so until we finally get it right sometime in 1995.
That's not a great danger, but just something possibly worth a a
My impression is that for a year or more most everyone has been either
using LOAD-1-FOREIGN or, sometimes, using LOAD-FOREIGN in a way which
can trivially be replaced with LOAD-1-FOREIGN. So the simple
LOAD-1-FOREIGN, possibly graced with a new name, looks like a
sufficiently stable interface that no particular caution would be
I don't remember what I said at the time, but I think I felt about the
same way as I do now. Neither my distaste for DWIM in noninteractive
interfaces (and suspicion of it even in interactive interfaces), nor
my dislike of things which don't quite work, nor my desire to keep
exported interfaces stable is a particularly recent development.:-)
> If the ability to blindly try and link stuff in dlo's is needed, then
> at least the name should be something like link-and-load-alien-library,
> do that people don't use it just because it has a shorter name.
William Harold Newman <william.newman@...>
INDEED. OH YES. I PLANNED TO SEE WHAT YOU WOULD DO. -- _Hogfather_, Pratchett
PGP key fingerprint 85 CE 1C BA 79 8D 51 8C B9 25 FB EE E0 C3 E5 7C