[asdf-devel] What do I win?

Robert Goldman rpgoldman at sift.info
Fri Oct 15 17:44:29 UTC 2010

On 10/15/10 Oct 15 -12:15 PM, Nikodemus Siivola wrote:
> On 15 October 2010 20:03, Robert Goldman <rpgoldman at sift.info> wrote:
>> Right.  But, honestly, I find
>> (:module "ports"
>>   :components
>>        (
>>         #+sbcl
>>         (:file "sbcl")
>>         #+ccl
>>         (:file "ccl"))
>>  ...)
>> a lot easier to read...
> Sure -- but it makes system-introspection limited to the
> implementation you are currently using.

I get it, but the value of such introspection seems, at the moment,
primarily conjectural, but the bewilderment of :if-component-dep-fails
is certain.  Actually, I also see that the manual says that
:if-component-dep-fails may be broken (see the object model section).

> ...of course, if ASDF had comething like
>   (:module "ports"
>     :components
>      (:file "sbcl" :when (feature :sbcl))
>      (:file "ccl" :when (feature :ccl)))
> then we'd be pretty close to best of both worlds

Agreed.  This is clearly The Right Thing.  Pretty much anyone looking at
this will know what it is intended to mean whereas, IMO, the
:if-component-dep-fails looks like an error-handler....

I think this is related to the fact that the feature "dependency" here
is really not, intuitively, acting like a dependency (which is expected
always to succeed).


More information about the asdf-devel mailing list