>> Actually, the asdf initialization routine could unconditionally >> add the asdf tree to the path: either it's present or not, but it >> doesn't hurt to try, >> and so no need to export ASDF_DEVEL_SOURCE_REGISTRY, then. > > I'm not entirely sure about this. Here's my question: if someone is > developing code in one of those modules, and wants to see if it messes > up ASDF development, might they want to override this to point to > private copies of some or all of the dependencies? In that case, maybe I > should leave it around.... > Another option: leave it around, but have it default to the ASDF source tree. Best of both worlds? OR, he could temporarily move away the ext/ directory while conducting his tests.
As usual, I like being able to configure, but I like even more being able to NOT configure. > This would also be a place to test your new quicker-loading option. > Certainly. > Very much open to suggestions. > —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org When you are young you are afraid people will steal your ideas; when you are old you are afraid they won't. — David D. Friedman _______________________________________________ Asdf-devel mailing list Asdf-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel
