On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 9:34 AM, rcn <r...@lateralt.net> wrote: > But loading all the required files from an "all.lisp" file makes asdf > unaware of the existence of those files, doesn't it?
I'm not sure what you mean. ASDF can follow the dependencies of all.lisp and become aware of whichever files are used. > I can use that as a > workaround but it has several disadvantages: The relationships between > those files and the rest of the system will be lost, and any changes > with regards to compilation/loading configuration (bundling, loading > from pre-compiled files) will have to be done manually in all.lisp, > hidden from the project .asd file. > I'm not at all sure what you mean. I use all.lisp a lot in lisp-interface-library, and I am not aware of missing out on any feature. > Given that a workaround is necessary for this, using a reader macro in > the system definition to unfold a list of :file components from a glob > pattern seems like a better solution, but it's a shame that such a basic > feature isn't supported out of the box. > You can use :defsystem-depends-on to load asdf extensions then use them. > In my opinion, if you really want to push asdf as the standard system > definition for Common Lisp, these kind of things (what the users need, > after all) should be given more attention. It's unusual for a > programming ecosytem to have a powerful system definition tool and > still having to rely on Makefiles and roll-your-own hacks for some > things. > > Don't get me wrong, I think asdf is a great tool and I thank you all for > the effort you put on it. > I don't actively maintain asdf anymore, but Robert does, and I'm sure he is accepting patches. —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org No one can make you feel inferior without your consent — Eleanor Roosevelt But you're only fooling yourself if you can't recognize your superiors — #f
