On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 12:14 PM, Mark Evenson <even...@panix.com> wrote: > Is their any informal ASDF policy on the stability unexported symbols > like UIOP::%RUN-PROGRAM? I suspect y'all reserve the right to yank the > rug at any point, right? Given that UIOP::%RUN-PROGRAM abstracts the > Lisp implementations capable of asynchronous operation, I guess it is a > little more stable. > The interface to UIOP::%RUN-PROGRAM is rather stable at this point, though I've refactored its internals recently. For historical reasons, it isn't exported — it used to be quite uglier and more limited than it is now.
I believe it's OK to use it, although we may or may not rename it if and when we officially export it (and may or may not provide a smooth transition, depending on whether anything in quicklisp depends on it). >> If you only care about CCL and SBCL, you can use UIOP::%RUN-PROGRAM. >> >> If you want a portable solution that requires an external library, try >> IOLIB/OS:CREATE-PROCESS. > > The "external library" library part of IOLIB always tends to make me shy > away. > That's a valid reason to stick with UIOP::%RUN-PROGRAM. —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org If prices are information, then subsidies are censorship. — Russ Nelson
