On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 8:35 PM, Stelian Ionescu <sione...@cddr.org> wrote: > You haven't stated what those issues are, not why you think this > approach is the best way to solve them nor why do you think it's > reasonable for a development machine to have a CL compiler but not a C > compiler.
I think it's quite reasonable for a Lisp programmer to minimise interaction with the C toolkit, in general, but the main issue here is that on some operating systems it can be quite a pain to set up said toolkit, particularly on Windows (and to a lesser extent on OS X). > 2) Undermines ASDF's internal invariants by copying files into the ASDF > cache from a secondary cache and creates empty files in the ASDF cache I'm not sure what empty files you're referring to, but the general idea is to replace the gcc+execution step with one that simply grabs a pre-cooked lisp file. How does that suddenly undermine any ASDF invariant? > 3) Creates cache keys using one of the most brittle mechanism in Common > Lisp (*features*). > Try thinking what happens during interactive development when a > developer changes *features* between compilations. If the environment changes in such a way that affects a given grovel file, a recompilation will be triggered. Seems like a feature, really. :-) Do you have an alternative suggestion that plays well with the ASDF/quicklisp environment? Cheers, -- Luís Oliveira http://kerno.org/~luis/
