Testing Quicklisp with ASDF
fahree at gmail.com
Wed May 31 14:28:56 UTC 2017
Why? Because the function has been deprecated for many many years. The only
reason it hasn't signaled a style-warning before is because ASDF lacked the
infrastructure to do so.
When? Is a better question. Now that ASDF does have this deprecation
infrastructure (since 3.2.0 in last January), is it a good time, less than
6 months later and without massive adoption of 3.2.0, to ramp up from
style-warning to full warning? Maybe not. I'm thinking that the full
warning may be usefully pushed back a few more months.
On Sun, May 28, 2017, 17:54 Anton Vodonosov <avodonosov at yandex.ru> wrote:
> 27.05.2017, 02:06, "Faré" <fahree at gmail.com>:
> ASDF 3.3.0 has failures:
> Thanks. Interesting.
> A whole lot of failures seem to be related to using now-deprecated
> functions, that since 3.2.0 where causing ASDF to issue a
> STYLE-WARNING, but with 3.3.0 are causing it to issue a full WARNING.
> I'll send patches.
> Fare, why do you want to fail compilation with WARNING
> on ASDF:SYSTEM-DEFINITION-PATHNAME usage?
> Best regards,
> - Anton
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the asdf-devel