Faré <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 5/ Finally, I would like confirmation that ASDF now handles outdated
>> fasl's correctly, and we don't need to do the black magick
>> ourselves.
>>
> I'm not sure what you mean, so I'd say probably not. If you have
> "black magick" that you think should be part of ASDF, please submit it
> here, and/or as an ASDF bug on launchpad.
Sorry for being too vague. For ASDF 1, I had a plug to automatically
recompile outdated fasls (I probably found it on the internet years ago;
don't remember):
(defmethod asdf:perform :around
((o asdf:load-op) (c asdf:cl-source-file))
(handler-case (call-next-method o c)
(#+sbcl sb-ext:invalid-fasl
#+cmu ext:invalid-fasl
#+allegro excl::file-incompatible-fasl-error
#+lispworks conditions:fasl-error
#-(or sbcl cmu allegro lispworks) error
()
(asdf:perform (make-instance 'asdf:compile-op) c)
(call-next-method))))
... and I was wondering if ASDF 2 did something like this on its own.
Thanks !
--
Resistance is futile. You will be jazzimilated.
Scientific site: http://www.lrde.epita.fr/~didier
Music (Jazz) site: http://www.didierverna.com
_______________________________________________
asdf-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel
