|
From: | Robert Weiner |
Subject: | Re: why is site-lisp placed before the default load path? |
Date: | Mon, 1 Aug 2016 13:54:49 -0400 |
But there are plenty of other ways to do that. This makes it a little too easy to override important core libraries, IMO.
realgud is just an example. It uses names like js.el and info.el because they are supposed to be loaded via `load-relative`, rather than required directly, but subdirs.el placing them at the front of the load path is what's causing trouble.
Rocky could add 'realgud-' to the beginning of every elisp file in the application,
but `load-relative` and the directory structure makes that unnecessary.You might argue that every elisp file in an application should be named to avoid conflicts with core libraries, but the only reason I see for that requirement is the current ordering of the load path.
And beyond the inconvenience caused by programs using `load-relative`, or programs just accidentally using the same name as a core library, it seems possible that a malicious developer could tuck their own `url.el` into an otherwise innocuous package and cause some mayhem.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |