fahree at gmail.com
Wed Jul 15 21:09:10 UTC 2015
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 10:32 PM, Attila Lendvai <attila at lendvai.name> wrote:
>> SYSTEM-MUTABLE-P take a real *SYSTEM* as argument, instead of having an
>> odd API where only a system-NAME is acceptable.
> CL-USER> (asdf:coerce-name (asdf:find-system :hu.dwim.def))
>> I think having a confusing name that we deprecate is better than taking
>> the good name, and implementing something bad on it. This way we can
>> think about a better API and put the better API on the better name.
> i thought (and stated previously, with a doubt) that RIS is something
> new, but now that i double checked i realized it's already there since
> 2014 aug, exported:
> it's a lost case then, it's already published, so there's no way other
> than the deprecation way. in that case it's not an urgent issue, just
> put it on the TODO.
It's been written last august, but in a branch that was rebased into
master around 18.104.22.168, so not all is lost. The only user so far is
Dave Cooper, and he's watching the list, so we can safely change the
API. The deeper question is: what exactly is the API we want?
Now that I look at the code, I believe one reason that
register-immutable-system works the way it does is so as to still work
after all systems are cleared, e.g. by a non-backward-compatible asdf
upgrade. See the (register-hook-function '*post-upgrade-cleanup-hook*
'clear-defined-systems nil) form in asdf/find-system.
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
Never abandon a theory that explains something until you have a theory that
explains more. — John McCarthy
More information about the asdf-devel