[Ecls-list] Question #2

[Gabriel Dos Reis]

On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll
<juanjose.garciaripoll at googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 10:59 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis
> <gdr at integrable-solutions.net> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Tobias C. Rittweiler <tcr at freebits.de>
>> wrote:
>> > How can restarts be nuisances?  You mean because users are dropped into
>> > the debugger?
>>
>> yes; most OpenAxiom users don't really care that behind the scene we
>> are using a Lisp system.  And dropping a end user into a debugger, for
>> a delivered application, is not what I would consider a user-friendly
>> interface.
>
> I am not at all for "clever" implementations because they prevent users from
> customizing the behavior. For instance, why impose a precise behavior for a
> stale-fasl error instead of just signalling an uncorrectable error and let
> the user handle it?

That is a simple implementation that would handle the far majority
of the cases that matter.  I would vote for simpliticity.

> ASDF could provide, via HANDLER-BIND, the appropriate
> recompilation restarts, but other software might not have that possibility
> -- in particular OpenAxiom invokes ECL for every file that is to be compiled
> -- and ECL itself does not know how to recompile arbitrary FASL files.

indeed.

-- Gaby