Note to myself

[Faré]

On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Robert Goldman <rpgoldman at sift.net> wrote:
> I have a note to myself to remove SOURCE-FILE-TYPE from the manual, and
> I see that it's there just for backwards compatibility.
>
Yes, it's deprecated and should be removed, or moved to a section:
"how do I upgrade these deprecated idioms?"

> Am I correct in saying that this should be replaced by COMPONENT-TYPE?
I see a remark to that effect under the definition of
component-relative-pathname,
but that's incorrect. My apologies for not seeing and fixing it earlier.

> That's what the comment says, but then I see this:
>
>   (defmethod source-file-type ((component file-component) (system
> parent-component))
>     (file-type component)))
>
> which suggests FILE-TYPE, not COMPONENT-TYPE is The Right Thing.
>
Indeed, the accessor you're looking for is FILE-TYPE.
Either the component's class defines a default value or an accessor,
or the component has to explicitly specify it.

> Also, what the heck is the return type of this?  I see the following:
>
>   (defmethod source-file-type ((component parent-component) (system
> parent-component))
>     :directory)
>
> which suggests that it's something like (or string (eql :directory)).
> Ugh.  Shouldn't asking for the file-type of a PARENT-COMPONENT simply be
> an error?
>
The correct type should be
(or null string (eql :directory))

I believe :directory is how we end up with pathnames for parent
components becoming directory pathnames, as in
(:module "foo" :pathname "bar" ...)
having a relative pathname #p"bar/" on Unix.

> Sorry to bother you about this: just trying to kill something that's
> languished on my todo list for more than a year.
>
Thank you for addressing these code quality and documentation items!

—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
A man of humanity is one who, in seeking to establish himself,
finds a foothold for others and who, in desiring attaining himself,
helps others to attain. — Confucius (551–479 BC)