Re: Issue: REQUIRE-PATHNAME-DEFAULTS (Version 3)

[sandra%defun@cs.utah.edu (Sandra J Loosemore)]

Allowing REQUIRE to load files as an extension seems like a lousy idea
to me for the same reason that I gave against having modules magically
PROVIDE themselves -- namely, it might assume a file/module
correspondence other than what the user intended, and load the wrong
file. 

How about wording the proposal to indicate that implementations
can extend REQUIRE to load files automagically only if the user has
*explicitly* indicated (using some implementation-specific mechanism)
which files make up that module?

That would allow 

    (defsystem foo ....)
    (require "FOO")

to work, but would prevent

    (require "FOO")

 from trying to load some random file named "FOO", which (as I've pointed
out earlier), may or may not contain the module "FOO".

-Sandra
-------