[asdf-devel] One failure on ASDF 184.108.40.206 on Allegro/Windows
Robert P. Goldman
rpgoldman at sift.info
Tue Feb 25 18:19:35 UTC 2014
> I recommend we just let the user choose between PATHNAME-EQUAL and
> PATHNAME-EQUALP, or some such.
The only question about this would be whether this is visible to the
user or not?
Looking into ASDF we find the following calls to PATHNAME-EQUAL:
* BINARY-OP calls PATHNAME-EQUAL to see if it will inadvertently
overwrite the system .asd file
* Under ECL and MKCL, when building a bundle, we use pushnew with
PATHNAME-EQUAL; if this is wrong, and PATHNAME-EQUALP is right, then we
could get duplicates in the bundle
* FIND-SYSTEM calls PATHNAME-EQUAL to see if the system definition
source file has been changed. A false positive here will cause
* SAME-PACKAGE-SYSTEM-P uses PATHNAME-EQUAL to check and see if two
package-systems are the same.
I don't see how these problems can be resolved by punting to the user:
the user doesn't have access to this level of control.
While I agree that a heuristic for deciding whether pathnames are
case-sensitive is not ideal, I don't see an alternative to supplying one.
But perhaps there's a different way out? At any rate, we'd have to
figure out how to handle the above cases.
More information about the asdf-devel