Subject: Re: Strange LOAD behaviour in CMUCL
From: Erik Naggum <>
Date: 1999/01/17
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <>

* Hannu Koivisto <>
| Thanks for the explanation.  This makes sense and is very logical, IMO
| also when the default pathname is relative too.  It's a shame HS seems to
| be so vague here.

  I think it makes sense to say that a using a relative default pathname
  defies its purpose, which I see as resolving relative and otherwise
  incomplete pathnames into absolute and otherwise complete pathnames.

  if a relative default pathname made sense, there would be something else
  that would make a pathname complete beside the default pathname, but
  where would that information come form?  Unix has a "superdefault" in the
  current working directory, but to use that as a basis of anything isn't
  even safe for Unix applications.

  SIGTHTBABW: a signal sent from Unix to its programmers at random
  intervals to make them remember that There Has To Be A Better Way.