22.01.2014, 23:07, "Faré" <[email protected]>: > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Anton Vodonosov <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I don't think that preserving OPERATION semantics is really ruled out. >> Lets consider it a little bit more? >> >> Is it true that old ASDF:OPERATION is semantically equivalent to the new >> DOWNWARD-OPERATION? If yes, the proposal I made earlier looks appropriate: >> >> OPERATION inherit from DOWNWARD-OPERATION >> COMPILE-OP inherit from OPERATION >> LOAD-OP inherit from OPERATION >> LOAD-SOURCE-OP inherit from OPERATION >> >> If we make so, these operations are backward compatible >> and at the same time fit the new ASDF 3 design. > > It's not backward compatible with systems that define methods on operation, > and expect the method to be always calls for all operations.
But does "all operations" for the old code means only: operation, compile-op, load-op, load-source-op, test-op and any descendants of those? Because old code knew only this hierarchy.
