On 3/23/10 Mar 23 -8:35 AM, james anderson wrote: > good morning; > > On 2010-03-18, at 21:41 , Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll wrote: >
> > Contributing to this problem is that the system and component forms are > not symmetrical. The intended syntax is[2], but the implementation is not: > > ? (defclass specialized-system (asdf:system) ()) > #<STANDARD-CLASS SPECIALIZED-SYSTEM> > ? (defclass specialized-source-file (asdf:cl-source-file) ()) > #<STANDARD-CLASS SPECIALIZED-SOURCE-FILE> > ? (eval '(asdf:defsystem :a-system :class specialized-system :components > ((:file "a-file")))) > #<SPECIALIZED-SYSTEM "a-system" #xEF6724E> > ? (eval '(asdf:defsystem :a-system :class specialized-system :components > ((:file "a-file" :class specialized-source-file)))) >> Error: :CLASS is an invalid initarg to REINITIALIZE-INSTANCE for > #<STANDARD-CLASS ASDF:CL-SOURCE-FILE>. >> Valid initargs: #(:CONTINGENT-ON :LONG-DESCRIPTION :DESCRIPTION > :NAME :VERSION :IN-ORDER-TO :DO-FIRST :PARENT :PATHNAME :PROPERTIES). >> While executing: CCL::CHECK-INITARGS >> Type Command-. to abort. > See the Restarts… menu item for further choices. > 1 > > > This should be corrected, in order that - even in the absence of an > intended extension, asdf can interpret the standard information in a > system definition. Please launchpad this bug, with a list of the set of initargs that need to be supported. Maybe this can be fixed. I am willing to believe that the initargs to system should be supported on components to the maximum extent possible. But I don't see any reason, a priori, that components and systems should be treated symmetrically. Why should we believe that, of necessity, every form of source file should be modeled by a data structure that shares every attribute of a system? To take an absurd case, we don't put file extensions on systems.... Actually, I'm pretty shocked by the extent that source files /already/ share the attributes of systems. For example, source files, as components, have :version attributes. But surely if one wanted to have versions on source-files, there should be some inheritance relationship between the :version one specifies on a parent system and the version specified for its components. But we make no attempt to do any such propagation. Nor, since the :version is a property that lives in the system definition, and since the :version property of a component is not readily checkable across system boundaries, does associating versions with components make any particular sense. The :class case, I'll grant you, /does/ make sense, but I'm not confident we should extrapolate too far from that. best, r _______________________________________________ asdf-devel mailing list asdf-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel
