On Sat, 2009-07-25 at 23:40 +0000, Luis Oliveira wrote: > Stelian Ionescu <[email protected]> writes: > > > Not necessary but very convenient. My problem was this dependency chain: > > osicat(syscalls) <- iolib(file-path) <- osicat(high-level) <- > > iolib(zeta-streams). > > Splitting osicat-posix and osicat into different systems would be pretty > easy since they already live in different packages, etc. (This is > mentioned in osicat.asd.)
True, but I don't want to expose the syscalls into their own package because I intend them to be just an implementation detail, nothing more. > Out of curiosity, what's iolib.pathnames for? The pathname abstraction that I'm working on. try (iolib.pathnames:file-path "/tmp"), for example -- Stelian Ionescu a.k.a. fe[nl]ix Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur. http://common-lisp.net/project/iolib
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ IOLib-devel mailing list [email protected] http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/iolib-devel
