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

[Scott.Fahlman@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU]

    Almost the only compromise I can think of is something that forces you
    to declare the non-portable loading intent in every use of REQUIRE, say:
     (REQUIRE "foo" :LOAD T)
    
    It would be useful to hear from someone other than the 3-4 of us who
    keep arguing this one.
    
OK.  I still think that the only reasonable course is to flush PROVIDE and
REQUIRE from the standard.  The discussions among those of you trying to
patch it up have only reinforced this view.  It didn't seem useful to keep
asserting this periodically, but that is my position until you hear
otherwise.  I suspect that many others share this view.

-- Scott