[asdf-devel] The issue at hand
rpgoldman at sift.net
Fri Jan 24 16:59:05 UTC 2014
Robert Brown wrote:
> I have not been following every last detail of this conversation,
> so please forgive me if what I'm about to suggest is a terrible idea.
All of the discussion I have snipped has been covered before, and fits
under my declining to discuss further. I apologize, but I simply don't
have any more time to discuss it further. Briefly: the extent of the
systems I intend ASDF to support is not limited to the set of systems in
Please, no more posts saying "we could just fix all of the libraries in
quicklisp." Faré has been saying this, if not until he's blue in the
face, certainly until *I* am blue in the face.
> By the way, regarding my PROTO-TO-LISP class. I want to inherit
> from DOWNWARD-OPERATION, right?
I'm not sure. Two possibilities:
1. You will OPERATE PROTO-TO-LISP on your system. In this case, yes,
because you want all the components to undergo this operation. You may
want SIDEWAY-OPERATION, as well, if PROTO-TO-LISP on one file requires
PROTO-TO-LISP on :Depends-on files.
2. You will OPERATE PROTO-TO-LISP only as a predecessor to COMPILE-OP
and LOAD-OP on the file. In this case a NON-PROPAGATING-OPERATION is
More information about the asdf-devel