[armedbear-devel] [armedbear-cvs] r12620 - trunk/abcl/src/org/armedbear/lisp

[Tobias C. Rittweiler]

Erik Huelsmann <ehuels at gmail.com> writes:

> Hi Mark,
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Mark Evenson <mevenson at common-lisp.net> wrote:
>> Author: mevenson
>> Date: Fri Apr 16 09:41:21 2010
>> New Revision: 12620
>>
>> Log:
>> Use interpreted form in a FASL if compliation fails.
>
> Although I think this is a great fallback, it seems to be
> automatically selected right now. I'm affraid of the negative side
> effects of that scenario: people will not notice that their code
> wasn't compiled, but is now interpreted instead. The ultimate side
> effect could be that we don't get any reports anymore regarding
> brokenness of our compiler.
>
> In my eyes, there are 2 ways forward with this: 1) We undo this
> option; this leaves users at a loss when compilation fails; they'll
> need to use the entire file uncompiled. 2) We make the fallback a
> selectable restart; this way, compilation gets interrupted, the user
> is aware and we're much more likely to receive our feedback. But the
> user isn't restricted to using a fully interpreted file anymore.
>
> Quite possibly, you can read my preference through the lines already:
> I think option (2) is *really* nice.
>
> What's your opinion on the matter?

For a semi-outsider: When does compilation fail where interpretation
would succeed?

  -T.