Re: defsystem vs asdf

> * Marco Antoniotti <[email protected]> [2005-08-16 15:34:09 -0400]:
>
> On Aug 16, 2005, at 3:30 PM, Paolo Amoroso wrote:
>
>> Sam Steingold <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>>> is it true that "defsystem is dead and everyone should switch to
>>> asdf"?
>>
>> I don't know whether DEFSYSTEM is dead.  But I would use CLOCC
>> subsystems much more if there was support for ASDF.
>>
>
> But MK:DEFSYSTEM supports subsystems in a nicer way than ASDF.

in what ways?

> So, the question is why don't you give it a spin.

I would much rather have one de-facto standard SDF than two similar but
incompatible ones.

since ASDF was created _after_ DEFSYSTEM, apparently it addresses some
problems with DEFSYSTEM (which ones?) and does not carry the same
backwards compatibility baggage.



-- 
Sam Steingold (http://www.podval.org/~sds) running w2k
<http://www.memri.org/> <http://truepeace.org> <http://pmw.org.il/>
<http://www.openvotingconsortium.org/> <http://www.savegushkatif.org>
Someone has changed your life.  Save? (y/n)



-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA
Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf