On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Faré <fah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>: Faré
>
> >> when asdf-ecl was initially written, its load-fasl-op was intended
> >> as the default way to load a system. Because of implementation bugs
> >> revealed as ASDF improved its testing, this feature was disabled at
> >> some point while developing ASDF 3.1. Now that these implementation
> >> bugs seem to have been solved, for both ECL and MKCL, the question is:
> >> do you guys want me to make load-bundle-op (as it is now named)
> >> the default *load-system-operation* on ECL and/or MKCL?
>
> >:JCB
> > I have been away from ASDF related concerns long enough for me
> > to be unable to form a precise understanding of what such move would
> > precisely mean right now, sorry. But I will try to push out the door
> > MKCL 1.1.10, the latest maintenance release of the MKCL 1.1.X line,
> > before the end of this month. And as part of that operation I want
> > to upgrade the bundled ASDF to 3.1.5. So I'll have then a great
> > opportunity to get reacquainted with all those load-XXX-op questions,
> > and I should be able to have an informed opinion by then.
> >
> The question is whether you prefer to load a previously compiled system
> via a single .fasb or via plenty of .fas (which wasn't previously working).
>
>
Put like this I would say that my natural inclination is to say that
.fasb should (always?) have precedence over a bunch of .fas if
the bunch of .fas provides the same functionality as the .fasb.
> > Are we talking about something like #'cl:lisp-implementation-version and
> > related facilities? If so then you could be interested in:
> >
> > #'si:mkcl-major-version
> > #'si:mkcl-minor-version
> > #'si:mkcl-patch-level
> >
> Is (lisp-implementation-version) guaranteed to be the concatenation
> of these, with no trailing data?
>
>
Well, the idea is indeed to let #'cl:lisp-implementation-version be free
to have some trailing data like perhaps a test level marker ("alpha",
"beta", "rc1"...). Otherwise our three little stooges up here would
be pretty redundant, wouldn't they?
But currently this returns T:
(string= (lisp-implementation-version)
(concatenate 'base-string
(si::mkcl-major-version)
"."
(si::mkcl-minor-version)
"."
(si::mkcl-patch-level)))
> —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics•
> http://fare.tunes.org
> ...so this guy walks into a bar.
> "The usual, Mr. Descartes?" the barman asked.
> "I think not," Rene replied, and promptly disappeared.
>
