Issues with package location information on SBCL

[Faré]

Thanks a lot for fixing this issue! I opened a MR based on it:
https://gitlab.common-lisp.net/asdf/asdf/merge_requests/92

—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
To be an anarchist only means that you believe that aggression is not
justified, and that states necessarily employ aggression. And, therefore,
that states, and the aggression they necessarily employ, are unjustified.
It's quite simple, really. It's an ethical view, so no surprise
it confuses utilitarians.
        —- N. Stephan Kinsella


On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 12:30 AM, Eric Timmons <etimmons at mit.edu> wrote:
> I've started testing ASDF 3.3.1.3 with my group's code on SBCL 1.4.4
> and noticed some issues with uiop:define-package (due to commit
> 8281e011).
>
> First, when compiling ASDF I get 456 compilation notes
> (https://pastebin.com/NnRUKGWe). I get the same notes when using
> uiop:define-package in our code as well. I honestly think this is an
> issue of SBCL being over aggressive. It's also odd because if the
> recording of the source location is removed, then the notes aren't
> produced. It appears this started happening in SBCL 1.4.1 (potentially
> due to commit af5e2ed1e).
>
> The volume of notes (especially when using package-inferred-system)
> can drown out real issues. I'll likely report this as an issue to SBCL
> since the keywords *should* be constant and the source transform for
> apply doesn't seem to be preserving that. However, it could also be
> fixed in ASDF by changing the apply to a funcall in the define-package
> expansion (patch 2).
>
> Second, the comma on (sb-c:source-location) seems to cause the source
> location for the package to always point to the body of the
> define-package macro. Patch 1 changes this so that form is evaluated
> after the macro is expanded. I didn't test this on anything earlier
> than SBCL 1.4.4, but I don't believe this behavior is version
> dependent.
>
> -Eric