10.02.2014, 02:31, Anton Vodonosov avodono...@yandex.ru:
27.01.2014, 11:04, Faré fah...@gmail.com:
Anton: can you run cl-test-grid against that?
If you have time, also try with (uiop:enable-deferred-warnings-check)
and also try with :uiop in the :use list of :asdf-user.
I have results
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 11:56 PM, Anton Vodonosov avodono...@yandex.ru wrote:
Next I will try the deferred-warnings
enabled and :uiop in the use-list of :asdf-user.
Thanks a lot!
I assume you're doing these tests separately:
I expect ~25 failures in the first test, and hopefully 0 in the
27.01.2014, 11:04, Faré fah...@gmail.com:
Anton: can you run cl-test-grid against that?
If you have time, also try with (uiop:enable-deferred-warnings-check)
and also try with :uiop in the :use list of :asdf-user.
I have results for ASDF 3.1.0.63 for these lisps:
Thanks a lot Anton.
Robert, is there any blocker to release?
Anton, would you have time to run the tests with the deferred-warnings
enabled? With :uiop in the use-list of :asdf-user?
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •ReflectionCybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
Living your life is a task so
good afternoon,
On 23 Jan 2014, at 6:18 PM, Robert P. Goldman wrote:
James Anderson has asked for a concise statement of the issue at hand.
thank you for responding to my questions and for shifting the focus of the
discussion to how to ensure that deployments of your library continue to work,
[Note to Robert: plenty of implementation notes in this email;
you may want to save it to include the data in the TODO file
and/or the manual.]
Dear James,
in case I didn't tell you, it's great to have you back in asdf-devel.
You kind of left some time after I didn't take your suggestion
to
Thanks to Anton's suggestion, the fix was relatively simple — see ASDF
3.1.0.56, commit eb2da723.
I also committed some improvements initiated during the walkthrough.
Anton: can you run cl-test-grid against that?
If you have time, also try with (uiop:enable-deferred-warnings-check)
and also try
On 24 Jan 2014, at 19:56, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
Pascal Costanza wrote:
The new ASDF will break systems that subclass OPERATION. Those
libraries' maintainers will have to look at their code, based on the
error message, and see what needs to be done. For the vast
On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Anton Vodonosov avodono...@yandex.ru wrote:
Theoretically, OPERATION may be the root class and keep the old semantics
(downward + selfward + other). And subclasses override this semantics
as they do now: DOWNWARD-PERATION, SELFWARD-OPERATION, etc.
This may
OK, will do. I will try to get all of the new operations written up,
but I don't believe I will have time until after the 31st (conference
deadlines, and end of contract dates mean that the ASDF manual has to
wait...).
Take your time. We're all impatient about it.
I do not yet the
26.01.14, 00:51, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info:
Faré wrote:
On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Anton Vodonosov avodono...@yandex.ru
wrote:
Theoretically, OPERATION may be the root class and keep the old semantics
(downward + selfward + other). And subclasses override this
On 25 Jan 2014, at 23:29, Faré fah...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, will do. I will try to get all of the new operations written up,
but I don't believe I will have time until after the 31st (conference
deadlines, and end of contract dates mean that the ASDF manual has to
wait...).
Take your
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 12:21 AM, Daniel Herring dherr...@tentpost.com wrote:
For those cases, I have pushed a change that checks to make sure that
all operations that are instantiated are subclasses of either
DOWNWARD-OPERATION, UPWARD-OPERATION, SIDEWAY-OPERATION,
SELFWARD-OPERATION, or a
Faré wrote:
Robert or Anton: could you grep the archives for my previous audit,
and try *using* some of the operations defined in Quicklisp?
This definitely needs be done before the release.
Unfortunately, I am not a quicklisp user. It does not fit the
development methods of my company.
Robert Brown wrote:
I have not been following every last detail of this conversation,
so please forgive me if what I'm about to suggest is a terrible idea.
[..snip..]
All of the discussion I have snipped has been covered before, and fits
under my declining to discuss further. I apologize,
The new ASDF will break systems that subclass OPERATION. Those
libraries' maintainers will have to look at their code, based on the
error message, and see what needs to be done. For the vast majority of
them, five minutes work will suffice. For those that take more... well,
as you point
Pascal Costanza wrote:
The new ASDF will break systems that subclass OPERATION. Those
libraries' maintainers will have to look at their code, based on the
error message, and see what needs to be done. For the vast majority of
them, five minutes work will suffice. For those that take
17 matches
Mail list logo
