On Sat, 2014-03-29 at 19:59 +0100, Pascal Costanza wrote: [...] > >>> That's not how it works, unless you include a bit for *rdff* in the > >>> name of the fasl cache directory — and since the planning is done > >>> based on pathnames before the compilation happens, that should still > >>> be *rdff* at the beginning of compilation. Otherwise, the build is not > >>> deterministic, and two different toplevel programs will poison each > >>> other's builds. > >> > >> …not even if you :force t? > >> > > If you make :force t the default, you lose incrementality, and fast > > startup time for end-user scripts. If you say "things are unsafe by > > default", you lose modularity and you make it impossible to distribute > > scripts to end users. Either way, if you don't have a deterministic > > build *by default*, easy deployment of scripts to end-users is not > > possible anymore. > > I understand your desire for deterministic builds. I don’t understand your > desire for deterministic builds being the default.
Utterances like this is what makes "academic" an insult in certain circles. -- Stelian Ionescu a.k.a. fe[nl]ix Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
