[asdf-devel] Re: Another grammar question

[Robert Goldman]

Faré wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Robert Goldman <rpgoldman at sift.net> wrote:
>> The :REQUIRE directive seems undocumented.
>>
>> Under what circumstances is it acceptable?
>>
> If I remember the intent and interpret the source code correctly,
> it is always acceptable, but highly non-portable, and is thus better
> guarded by a
> (:feature :sbcl (:require :sb-posix))
> or
> (:feature :ecl (:require :sockets))
> or some such.
>
> The result being that your component depends on a system that when
> loaded calls (require name).

I see.  We had done something like that, but by having a pseudo-system type called REQUIRE-SYSTEM, and setting it up to use REQUIRE for (PERFORM LOAD-OP SYSTEM)....

I have a documentation patch that describes REQUIRE now.  Should push it soon.

Cheers,
r