[hunchentoot-devel] Small patch for LispWorks 6 beta

[Edi Weitz]

On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 8:49 PM, Nico de Jager <ndj at bitart.cc> wrote:

> No, it is as intended. Please correct me if I am having a brain fart.

My bad.  I didn't look closely enough.

> The first patch I sent to Edi privately, was as the one at the
> bottom. But isn't
>
> #+:lispworks4  ==  #-(or :lispworks5 :lispworks6)
> and
> #-:lispworks4  ==  #+(or :lispworks5 :lispworks6)
>
> when we are only considering version 4, 5 and 6? In fact, the patch at
> the top is better, since when LispWorks 7.x comes out the patch above
> will already work as it covers versions 4 and higher, but the patch
> below will have to be amended, since it only covers version 4, 5 and
> 6. Which one is clearer, is subjective - I like the one at the top
> because the exceptions is specifically for LispWorks4 and for the reason
> described in the previous sentence.

What I don't like about this is that it doesn't take LW3 into account... :)

Only half joking, really.  Starting with LW4 seems a rather arbitrary
assumption to me although the code very likely won't work with LW3
anyway, but the code isn't self-documenting anymore.  #-:lispworks4
says "for all except LW4" while you actually wanted to say "for LW5
and LW6 and maybe LW7 as well".

> B.t.w. the double #+:lispworks5 #+:lispworks5 in the original code is a
> (harmless) mistake, correct?

No, it's on purpose.  It affects the /two/ forms following it and your
patch must also take care of two forms.

Thanks,
Edi.