[asdf-devel] Pushed version -- first version with checks for OPERATION subclasses -- please test!

Faré fahree at gmail.com
Wed Jan 22 00:23:53 UTC 2014

On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Robert P. Goldman <rpgoldman at sift.info> wrote:
> If you have any systems that define their own subclasses of OPERATION,
> *please* pull this update and test.
> This new version checks to see if OPERATION classes have been updated to
> adapt to Fare's refactoring of the OPERATION class hierarchy.
> In a nutshell, Fare has added MIXIN subclasses of OPERATION that control
> the propagation of dependencies.  These new subclasses are
> To these, I have added NON-PROPAGATING-OPERATION.
> New subclasses of OPERATION will be checked to see if they inherit from
> one of the above classes, and if they do not, ASDF will signal an error.
> Fixes for this error should look something like this:
> (defclass my-operation (OPERATION)
>   ...)
> should turn into something like
> (defclass my-operation (#-asdf3 OPERATION #+asdf3 DOWNWARD-OPERATION)
>   ...)
> with DOWNWARD-OPERATION being replaced by whatever is/are the
> appropriate dependency (non-)propagating class(es).
> I hope to add a page or two to the Texinfo documentation to provide more
> information before the final release.
I'm worried about this patch. Can you get it tested with cl-test-grid
before release? I fear there are many currently working systems that
will break due to this change.

Anton, can you help?

—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
As of vices, the State will let you devote your life to a false religion,
encourage you to have too many kids, but ban use of psychedelics.

More information about the asdf-devel mailing list