Re: [asdf-devel] maybe hot-upgrade of ASDF is not needed anymore

2013-02-07 Thread Robert Goldman
On 2/7/13 Feb 7 -2:49 PM, Anton Vodonosov wrote: 07.02.2013, 07:02, Faré fah...@gmail.com: On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 9:22 PM, Anton Vodonosov avodono...@yandex.ru wrote: I have impression that the code upgrade support is one of the most expensive features in ASDF. It is, and by far.

Re: [asdf-devel] maybe hot-upgrade of ASDF is not needed anymore

2013-02-07 Thread Anton Vodonosov
08.02.2013, 01:11, Robert Goldman rpgold...@sift.info: On 2/7/13 Feb 7 -2:49 PM, Anton Vodonosov wrote:  Also, if user wants to use newer version of ASDF than is provided with hist CL implementations,  he just loads the newer ASDF. After this, even if he does (require :asdf) the ASDF

Re: [asdf-devel] maybe hot-upgrade of ASDF is not needed anymore

2013-02-07 Thread Robert Goldman
On 2/7/13 Feb 7 -3:29 PM, Anton Vodonosov wrote: 08.02.2013, 01:11, Robert Goldman rpgold...@sift.info: On 2/7/13 Feb 7 -2:49 PM, Anton Vodonosov wrote: Also, if user wants to use newer version of ASDF than is provided with hist CL implementations, he just loads the newer ASDF. After

Re: [asdf-devel] testing asdf 2.28 [was: can't run quicklisp with asdf 2.28 on CCL (upgrage issue?)] [was: sbcl results for quicklisp + asdf 2.28]

2013-02-07 Thread Faré
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 9:22 PM, Anton Vodonosov avodono...@yandex.ru wrote: Diff between unpatched quicklisp 2013-01-28 and quicklisp 2013-01-28 + asdf 2.28.6 for SBCL and CCL: http://common-lisp.net/project/cl-test-grid/asdf/asdf-diff-9.html 07.02.2013, 07:16, Faré fah...@gmail.com: On