Robert, what delay are you apologizing for? I'm aware only of the delay from my side. :)
The results for ASDF
Lisps tested so far:
Best regards,
- Anton
14.02.2018, 22:02, "Robert Goldman" <>:

OK, as I said, sorry about the delay. Anton, in place of Fare's #3 below, will you please just test what's in the syntax-control-based-on-standard-syntax branch? The comparison between 2 and 3 will tell us to what extent it's an issue to lock in standard syntax instead of whatever happens to be the current readtable when ASDF is loaded.


On 13 Feb 2018, at 22:36, Robert P. Goldman wrote:

I'll get you a branch with the other setting for the syntax control, so you can just test with that instead of having to modify anything yourself. I'll get it pushed sometime tomorrow.

Sorry for the delay.

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 13, 2018, at 20:15, Anton Vodonosov <> wrote:

Faré, hello.

Sorry for replying so long - I'm almost paralyzed by too many things I need to deal with currently.
I've started tests for the following commit. Will follow-up with the results.

commit 2a5bc3bece8f97fdf64dc73a4e0544a55ae38f9d
Author: Robert P. Goldman <>
Date: Tue Jan 16 16:20:15 2018 -0600

Bump version to

02.02.2018, 23:06, "Faré" <>:

Dear Anton,

can you run the below tests, in order or priority?

1- Can you test what is currently in master, a.k.a., as a
release candidate for 3.3.2? It has been too long since 3.3.1 was
released with several bugs that have impacted Quicklisp users.

2- Can you test what is currently in the syntax-control branch as a
release candidate for 3.3.3 or 3.4.0? We want to merge syntax control,
but it's a significant enough change that we don't want it at the same
time as the bug fixes. Also...

3- Can you test what is currently in the syntax-control branch as a
release candidate for 3.3.3 or 3.4.0, but with the following addition
just after you load asdf but before you start using it: (defparameter
uiop:*shared-readtable* (copy-readtable nil)) ? Indeed, we want to see
what breaks if we disable extensions implementation-specific reader
extensions. Test most important on CCL. I don't expect much breakage
on other implementations, but it may exist, too.

4- While you're at it, can you also run the test, at least on sbcl,
with (defparameter uiop:*shared-readtable* uiop:*standard-readtable*))
? This will detect what breaks when we make the default readtable

The thing is, we really want to have this syntax control, but we also
want to preserve backward compatibility, and we can't make asdf
stricter until every client is fixed (famous last word; of course we
failed at exactly that in 3.3.1 — we could build correctly, but would
also spuriously rebuild if secondary systems were misnamed; fixed in

—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics•
A friend once asked me if I had ever considered terrorism as a means for
political change. I replied that yes, I had considered it... and rejected it.
Because it only causes change for the worse.
Killing innocent people does not promote a culture of peaceful interaction.


Reply via email to