[asdf-devel] :logical-hostname

[james anderson]

On 2010-03-30, at 16:42 , Robert Goldman wrote:

> On 3/30/10 Mar 30 -9:29 AM, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 4:25 PM, Robert Goldman <rpgoldman at sift.info
>> <mailto:rpgoldman at sift.info>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>     Question:  should we raise a style warning if the user supplies a
>>     logical pathname that does not comply with the ANSI spec?  I  
>> would
>>     prefer that we do that.
>>
>>
>> The first question is whether we are going to provide a logical  
>> hostname
>> or whether instead we will allow the user to provide a full logical
>> pathname translation. That is
>>
>> :logical-host "CL-PPCRE"
>>
>> versus
>>
>> :logical-path "CL-PPCRE:MY-DESIRED;SET;OF;VIRTUAL;DIRECTORIES;*.*.*"
>>
>> The latter is trickier and proner to break. If we use the former  
>> we can
>> provide two sets of translations

it may be prone to break, but that just means one must pay attention.

it would be ok if, given just the host name, asdf were to assert  
translations which are the equivalent of the current binary mappings.
if the argument is a translation specification, there is no reason  
not to believe it and apply it as given.

>
> I agree.  In particular, I have vague memories of differences between
> ACL and SBCL on how to handle the *.*.* versus *.*, but this is  
> lost in
> my neural network.

my experience is that it depends entirely on whether the runtime  
supports versions at all.
if one intended a logical host translation spec to behave "the same"  
on a runtime which supports file versions as on one which does not,  
one has to express the respective mappings correctly.