Quesstion about Alt-. navigation to function definitions
gendl at genworks.com
Thu Oct 31 01:13:08 UTC 2013
The quicklisp/local-projects/ directory is just one convenient place to put
stuff, nothing dictates that you have to put it there.
You can also put your own .asd systems elsewhere and set up a call to:
(pushnew ".../my-projects/" ql:*local-project-directories* :test
Yes, you have to evaluate these two lines after making a new .asd file. But
if you put all your projects under ".../my-projects/" then nothing else has
to change so it can be part of a standard thingie you just call after
setting up a new experimental project.
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 8:26 PM, Jeffrey Cunningham <
jeffrey at jkcunningham.com> wrote:
> On 10/30/2013 04:52 PM, Zach Beane wrote:
> Jeffrey Cunningham <jeffrey at jkcunningham.com> <jeffrey at jkcunningham.com> writes:
> But what about the very common (for me, at least) case where I want to
> experiment around with some code that is not intended to go in a
> One option is to learn a different way. I start almost every experiment
> with the three-file system of foo.asd, package.lisp, and foo.lisp, which
> makes it and its dependencies trivially quickloadable. And the
> experiments often grow into something I want to save for easy reuse.
> I'm fine with learning a different way. Actually, I experimented with your
> quickproject utility when you first released it. I like the idea of it. But
> the single significant drawback for me is that it seems to require project
> files to be located to suit the needs of the tool rather than the needs of
> (for me) the work. If I'm contracting for companyX their files all go
> somewhere within a companyX folder. Their data goes there. Their docs.
> Everything. I can tarball the whole thing up and send it to them. I can
> archive it. I can send it to Richard Snowden. Whatever. It seems to me that
> the requirements of the package methodology you are suggesting requires
> that I either do my contract work in subdirectories of the quicklisp folder
> of some other standard ASD visible folder, or be continually modifying the
> ASD paths so the loader knows where to find them. Maybe I haven't just
> wrapped my head around it right, but it seems odd to have to build a
> package just to load some other packages and use them.
> I agree that many, many times what started out experimental developed into
> a package I've reused for other projects. I think if I could figure out how
> to keep files organized by job rather than by tool I'd be all for your
Dave Cooper, Genworks Support
david.cooper at genworks.com, dave.genworks.com(skype)
USA: 248-327-3253(o), 1-248-330-2979(mobile)
UK: 0191 645 1699
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the slime-devel