[asdf-devel] maybe hot-upgrade of ASDF is not needed anymore

Robert Goldman rpgoldman at sift.info
Thu Feb 7 22:12:09 UTC 2013

On 2/7/13 Feb 7 -3:56 PM, Anton Vodonosov wrote:
> 08.02.2013, 01:43, "Robert Goldman" <rpgoldman at sift.info>:
>> On 2/7/13 Feb 7 -3:36 PM, Anton Vodonosov wrote:
>>>  08.02.2013, 01:34, "Robert Goldman" <rpgoldman at sift.info>:
>>>>  I'm still not following you.  If I have a stale copy of ASDF that came
>>>>  with my implementation, and I load it,
>>>  No, you do not load stale version.
>> Is this always achievable?
>> I don't know enough about the range of implementations to know if it's
>> always possible to avoid loading a stale ASDF.
>> Is there any case where the implementation uses ASDF enough that one
>> must load ASDF in order to get the implementation into a position where
>> it can load Quicklisp?
> I haven't tested all the implementations. Fare told me once that 
> he is not aware of any implementation that loads ASDF without you explicitly doing a (require "asdf").

If I do a (require <FOO>) for <FOO> some internally supplied library of
SBCL, doesn't that trigger the use of ASDF to load <FOO>?


More information about the asdf-devel mailing list