[asdf-devel] [cclan-list] How to depend on a system optionally?
gwking at metabang.com
Tue Jul 21 15:57:32 UTC 2009
> Gary King wrote:
>> I share Robert's queasiness and also think that we want ASDF to
>> these sorts of dependencies (simple, weak, contingent, etc... (?)).
I will do this.
>> I'm going to update the manual with James's table (thanks James!)
>> in the
>> hopes of giving us a place to hang our collective hats.
This is done.
> That sounds like a good idea, modulo it would be great to put it in
> new section like "TODO list" or "Missing bits in implementation."
> How about pushing my documentation of weakly-depends-on at the same
> time? Possibly with some warning that the implementation of this may
> Suggestion: instead of using a trick to get the square peg
> :weakly-depends on logic to sorta fit in the round-hole :depends-on
> slot, which forces us to (inappropriately, IMO) evaluate this stuff at
> macroexpansion time, I think we should suck it up and add extra slots
> for weak dependencies and contingent dependencies.
> Follow-on suggestion: we need to think about what happens when a
> component has all possible combinations of :depends-on,
> :weakly-depends-on, and :contingent-on. Does something that would not
> be loaded because of :contingent-on avoid a crash that would come
> from a
> violated :depends-on?
> Extra bonus follow-on: are these expected to be meaningful when the
> depended-on item is a system (clearly yes), a feature (seems handy),
> arbitrary component (what would this mean?)?
Gary Warren King, metabang.com
Cell: (413) 559 8738
Fax: (206) 338-4052
gwkkwg on Skype * garethsan on AIM * gwking on twitter
More information about the asdf-devel