Oh yes - this should hopefully also fix the problem with (:static-file "foo.bar") previously expanding to a (make-pathname :name "foo.bar" :type nil) Now it would expand to (pathname "foo.bar")
[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | Reflection&Cybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it. -- G.K. Chesterton 2009/8/28 Faré <[email protected]>: > For years now, we at ITA have been satisfied with a patch that does > the following while building QRes: allow to specify module names that > include a directory component, without having to redundantly as in > > (:module "subdir1/subdir2" > :components ((:file "subdir3/name3") (:file "subdir4/name4.subname4"))) > > instead of the cumbersome (to be portable): > > (:module "subdir1/subdir2" :pathname #.(make-pathname :directory > '(:relative "subdir" "subdir2")) > :components ((:file "subdir3/name3" :pathname #.(make-pathname > :directory '(:relative "subdir3" :name "name3"))) > (:file "subdir4/name4.subname4" :pathname #.(make-pathname > :directory '(:relative "subdir4" :name "name4.subname4")))))) > > Since there is active ASDF development again, I cleaned it up and here it is. > > The methods should replace those currently in ASDF. The helper > function now uses the existing ASDF split function (as previously > requested by Xof). > > The patch is both backwards compatible and portable, in that > * the "/" character was previously forbidden in names of portable > components without a :pathname statement, least it breaks miserably on > most platforms. > * the "/" character is now recognized by ASDF itself as a separator > for directories later made with make-pathname, thus doing what is > expected even on the odd platform without "/" as the pathname > separator. > > [ François-René ÐVB Rideau | Reflection&Cybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] > Selfishness is the measure of all good (and bad) in the world. There cannot be > any good whatsoever without a self to feel it. WHO is whatever "altruistic" > oppression ever good for? No one. Why is gratuitous vandalism or > well-intentioned mass murder bad? Not because it is selfish, but precisely > because it hurts other people's selfish interest. > _______________________________________________ asdf-devel mailing list [email protected] http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel
