Dear Juanjo,
Indeed. This or any other way that does not break current ASDF. What I would
like is seamless integration without imposing something that is prone to
break in the future. Another possibility would be for OUTPUT-FILES to return
two values: the list and an optional second value
On 15 March 2010 10:56, james anderson james.ander...@setf.de wrote:
good afternoon;
this does not sound like a case for specialization. it sounds more
like delegation.
what about hooking an output translator into the components.
if it is there, it is used. if it is not, no translation
On 3/15/10 Mar 15 -11:11 AM, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll wrote:
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Faré fah...@gmail.com
mailto:fah...@gmail.com wrote:
(defmethod output-files :around ((op operation) (c component))
Translate output files, unless asked not to
(multiple-value-bind
On 3/15/10 Mar 15 -3:48 PM, Faré wrote:
On 15 March 2010 15:37, Robert Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
On 3/15/10 Mar 15 -3:20 PM, Faré wrote:
Meh, right at the moment I was considering getting rid of asdf:around...
Right, but the programmer is likely to want to be able to have his/her
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 1:36 AM, Faré fah...@gmail.com wrote:
1- you want an ASDF operation that dumps some description of
things to be loaded.
2- you want to use a .asd itself as the output of that operation.
3- you want some location-independence in that description.
I presume the role
On 14 March 2010 04:21, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll
juanjose.garciarip...@googlemail.com wrote:
No, interchangeability means not chance of using the library as it was used.
Not having it means that new ways of loading code and linking it into
executables of libraries should be found. New functions,
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll
juanjose.garciarip...@googlemail.com wrote:
I must admit that after four hours fighting with this I am right now a bit
pissed off, so please forgive the tone of the message.
ASDF has introduced a new caching system which alters the
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 4:40 PM, Faré fah...@gmail.com wrote:
It's also what I committed to 1.634.
Thanks for your explanations and corrections. I just updated ECL to use
1.634.
FYI, the reason why I did not add **/*.* is because the sbcl case was just
specified like that: (getenv SBCL_HOME),
: Juanjo
I was just thinking how to extend this functionality to user-defined systems
and hit another problem. The goal is to take an ASDF system and prepare a
bundle that contains a PREBUILT-SYSTEM file (*.asd), a library file (*.a or
*.lib) and a FASL (*.fas) This set of files can then be
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 8:50 PM, Faré fah...@gmail.com wrote:
Where is the file to be when you compile?
Where is the file to be when you load?
How do you currently do things, and what breaks?
Could say, a logical pathname host LIB:
help locate the libraries?
How do you do things without
10 matches
Mail list logo
