> On 23 Aug 2016, at 04:23, Faré <fah...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear Elias,
Dear Faré, > I gave a cursory look at your PR curently culminating at > https://gitlab.common-lisp.net/asdf/asdf/commit/f8068ef93f71908f3c7786c62e94f0c9c615f271 thanks! > 1- Why do you (setf (fdefinition '%wait-process-result) > #'wait-process-result) ? I can't find any mention of that symbol in > quicklisp besides copies of asdf or uiop. I propose you kill that old > symbol and rename the new one to whatever you prefer. wait-process or > process-wait, without -result, would be nice. Though whether you use > process as prefix or suffix, try to make it coherent in all function > names. Great, the fewer unnecessary names the better. I was wondering about the process prefix/suffix already. I found alive-p (vs. process-alive-p) and status (vs. process-status) too short and not self-explanatory. But then, I found process-close-streams too long (albeit not by a lot so maybe that’s actually a good name) and process-close confusing weird. So currently, I have, among the exported functions: - process-alive-p - terminate-process - wait-process - close-streams > 2- Similarly, when deciding what to do with internals (or even > externals), grep'ing the contents of quicklisp is good policy. Though > regarding external symbol, even if no one in quicklisp uses it, it's > good citizenship to go through a complete 2-year obsolescence cycle. The sources for every project on quicklisp? Is there a central repository that holds all of those, or a simple way to obtain them? > 3- I find %if-on-lispworks7+ particularly ugly. I'd create a feature > and add it in common-lisp.lisp. But I admit this is a weak preference. Yes, I found it terribly ugly, too. I wasn’t aware that adding to *features* was something you’re allowed to do. I’ve now done that in https://gitlab.common-lisp.net/asdf/asdf/commit/13df4e9364527dd5b9197012b1eb95c6e9b9bcd1 and the code has ended up looking quite a bit nicer again, in particular because with #+ instead of macros I don’t need to use find-symbol* and (declare (ignore)) will work. I’ve also pushed a fix for the LispWorks 6 warning in https://gitlab.common-lisp.net/asdf/asdf/commit/590952a8afc9ca57e0a9cc917105b6f1d4039351 (thanks a lot to Robert for helping me debug that!). If we can agree on Robert’s unsupported-functionality error class, I’ll work that into the merge request, too. Elias
