Done, please see the pull requests #39 on github. Best regards, - Anton
26.02.2014, 22:47, "Luís Oliveira" <lolive...@common-lisp.net>: > Hello Anton, > > For some reason I missed this email. Found it on Gmane for some random > reason. Sorry for the late reply! > > On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 5:58 AM, Anton Vodonosov <avodono...@yandex.ru> wrote: > >> Possible simple fix is to introduce new condition cffi-grovel:grovel-error >> and shadow cl:error in the cffi-grovel package, instead writing >> an own cff-givel:error function with the same prototype as cl:error, >> but with the condition type it signals will be cffi-grovel:grovel-error. >> >> If you agree to this proposal I am willing to provide a patch. > > I think it's cleaner to define a GROVEL-ERROR function rather than > shadow ERROR. Other than that, your proposal makes perfect sense. > Please do send a pull request! > > Thanks, > > -- > Luís Oliveira > http://kerno.org/~luis/ _______________________________________________ Cffi-devel mailing list Cffi-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cffi-devel
