Robert P. Goldman
rpgoldman at sift.info
Mon Aug 1 02:10:40 UTC 2016
On 7/31/16 Jul 31 -9:06 PM, Faré wrote:
>> The closest I'd be willing to go is to remove UIOP:*FATAL-CONDITIONS*
>> > and replace it with a type definition for UIOP:FATAL-CONDITION. But
>> > even that makes me feel bad. I guess we can keep this for now, but I'll
>> > be a lot happier when it's simply an alias for CL:SERIOUS-CONDITION.
> I believe I added UIOP:*FATAL-CONDITIONS* so that users could
> customize the use of WITH-FATAL-CONDITION-HANDLER. I believe it's
> But please remove *fatal-condition-exceptions*.
I have kept WITH-FATAL-CONDITION-HANDLER, but removed
I simplified W-F-C-H to be simply a handler for UIOP:FATAL-CONDITION,
since we don't need to have a list-valued UIOP:*FATAL-CONDITIONS* -- we
can simply define UIOP:FATAL-CONDITION with OR.
I'm running the tests now, and will then commit a proposed new version.
I'll send out an email when it's done, and you can review it and let me
know what you think, ok?
I think it's best for you to have a clear proposal to review, instead of
just a description thereof. I look forward to hearing what you think.
More information about the asdf-devel