[asdf-devel] asdf output locations

[Tobias C. Rittweiler]

"Tobias C. Rittweiler" <...> writes:

> I'll do so. The PS is README.asdf-output-locations written by Fare.
>
>   -T.
>
> PS.
>
> =====================
> ASDF Output Locations
> =====================
>
> This file specifies how ASDF stores "binary" outputs for its operations,
> typically Lisp FASL files, but also any other files
> that may be generated, e.g. C files and executables from CFFI-GROVEL.

I think this is going to be base for the actual documentation. So I'll
raise a few points I'd like to see in the final documentation.

Two things:

  a) I don't particularly like the name Output Locations. I can
     understand that a different name is needed. "FASL Location", would
     probably be most intuitive to Lispers -- though it can be used for
     more stuff.

     A compromise would be to call the chapter in the actual
     documentation, "ASDF Output (FASL) Locations."

  b) The documentation should shortly reflect how this was, implicitly,
     done in the past, and to what problems it lead.


> Backward Compatibility
> ======================
>
> We purposefully do not provide backward compatibility with earlier versions of
> asdf-binary-locations (8 Sept 2009),
> common-lisp-controller (6.17) or
> cl-launch (2.35),
> each of which had similar general capabilities.
>
> Future versions of same packages (if any)
> will hopefully use the new ASDF API as defined below.
>
> Indeed, few people use and customize these packages;
> these people are experts who can trivially adapt to the new configuration.
> Other people will experience software that "just works".

Again two points:

  a) You should give short reason why backwards incompatibility is not
     provided. In particular, what the problems are with status quo.

  b) Let's say someone is using the old ASDF-Binary-Locations (the
     package as it was before the merge into ASDF proper), let's further
     say his implementation will upgrade to the new ASDF, and he will
     update to this new version of his implementation -- will the old
     ABL package break under his feet? Silently fail?


  -T.