Re: Syntax control code

[Faré]

On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 6:56 AM, Erik Huelsmann  wrote:
> gitlab is back up now.
>
Thanks a lot, Erik! Congrats for drive-by bugfixing!

So the official URLs are:
Syntax control merge request:
https://gitlab.common-lisp.net/asdf/asdf/merge_requests/86
Current version of the document in the syntax-control branch:
https://gitlab.common-lisp.net/asdf/asdf/blob/syntax-control/doc/syntax-control.md
Final location of the document, once the branch is merged:
https://gitlab.common-lisp.net/asdf/asdf/blob/master/doc/syntax-control.md

—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection• http://fare.tunes.org
Microphones, liberating singers from having to be loud to be heard, gave back
to each language a music that matches its own prosody.

Re: Syntax control code

[Erik Huelsmann]

gitlab is back up now.

Regards,

Erik.

On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 12:39 PM, Faré  wrote:

> It's in doc/syntax-control.md in the syntax-control branch (MR !86 on
> gitlab).
> Unhappily, gitlab.common-lisp.net seems to be down right now:
> https://gitlab.common-lisp.net/asdf/asdf
> If symptom persists, you may have to use my github backup in the meantime.
> https://github.com/fare/asdf/blob/syntax-control/doc/syntax-control.md
>
> —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection•
> http://fare.tunes.org
> From a programmer's point of view, the user is a peripheral that types
> when you issue a read request. — P. Williams
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 5:24 AM, 73budden .  wrote:
> > Hi! Where the document is found?
> >
> > 2018-01-06 3:53 GMT+03:00, Robert Goldman :
> >> I just pushed an edit of syntax-control.md in which I try to capture
> the
> >> terminology.
> >>
> >> Status: several Allegro failures break for me on test-syntax-control.
> >> Results from Linux:
> >>
> >> build/results/allegro8_64-test.text
> >> build/results/allegro8_64_s-test.text
> >> build/results/allegromodern8_64-test.text
> >> build/results/allegromodern8_64_s-test.text
> >> build/results/allegromodern_64-test.text
> >> build/results/allegromodern_64_s-test.text
> >>
> >> These failures seem to be due to NAMED-READTABLES not working properly
> >> on these platforms, rather than on anything ASDF itself does.
> >>
> >> Concern:  As I was reading over syntax-control.md, it was brought home
> >> to me that the ASDF shared syntax is initialized to the *initial syntax*
> >> on the host implementation, rather than the standard syntax of ANSI CL.
> >> My understanding is that this is done for backwards-compatibility with
> >> some QL systems that assume they have access to extended syntax from
> >> some implementation(s).  I'm concerned that this will create a
> >> maintenance headache going forward just so someone *else* can avoid
> >> making some minor clean-up.  Should we just suck it up and make the
> >> shared syntax start out with the initial syntax?  Why not break it now,
> >> and save ourselves trouble later?  Also, it seems like "initial syntax"
> >> is not well-defined, even on a single implementation, since ASDF might
> >> be loaded at arbitrary times, possibly after modifications to the
> >> "initial initial" readtable.  Finally, going forward, people will be
> >> yelling at *us* if implementations change their initial syntax.
> >>
> >> Unless there's a really important reason to keep this, I think we should
> >> kill it.
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>


-- 
Bye,

Erik.

http://efficito.com -- Hosted accounting and ERP.
Robust and Flexible. No vendor lock-in.

Re: Syntax control code

[Faré]

It's in doc/syntax-control.md in the syntax-control branch (MR !86 on gitlab).
Unhappily, gitlab.common-lisp.net seems to be down right now:
https://gitlab.common-lisp.net/asdf/asdf
If symptom persists, you may have to use my github backup in the meantime.
https://github.com/fare/asdf/blob/syntax-control/doc/syntax-control.md

—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection• http://fare.tunes.org
>From a programmer's point of view, the user is a peripheral that types
when you issue a read request. — P. Williams


On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 5:24 AM, 73budden .  wrote:
> Hi! Where the document is found?
>
> 2018-01-06 3:53 GMT+03:00, Robert Goldman :
>> I just pushed an edit of syntax-control.md in which I try to capture the
>> terminology.
>>
>> Status: several Allegro failures break for me on test-syntax-control.
>> Results from Linux:
>>
>> build/results/allegro8_64-test.text
>> build/results/allegro8_64_s-test.text
>> build/results/allegromodern8_64-test.text
>> build/results/allegromodern8_64_s-test.text
>> build/results/allegromodern_64-test.text
>> build/results/allegromodern_64_s-test.text
>>
>> These failures seem to be due to NAMED-READTABLES not working properly
>> on these platforms, rather than on anything ASDF itself does.
>>
>> Concern:  As I was reading over syntax-control.md, it was brought home
>> to me that the ASDF shared syntax is initialized to the *initial syntax*
>> on the host implementation, rather than the standard syntax of ANSI CL.
>> My understanding is that this is done for backwards-compatibility with
>> some QL systems that assume they have access to extended syntax from
>> some implementation(s).  I'm concerned that this will create a
>> maintenance headache going forward just so someone *else* can avoid
>> making some minor clean-up.  Should we just suck it up and make the
>> shared syntax start out with the initial syntax?  Why not break it now,
>> and save ourselves trouble later?  Also, it seems like "initial syntax"
>> is not well-defined, even on a single implementation, since ASDF might
>> be loaded at arbitrary times, possibly after modifications to the
>> "initial initial" readtable.  Finally, going forward, people will be
>> yelling at *us* if implementations change their initial syntax.
>>
>> Unless there's a really important reason to keep this, I think we should
>> kill it.
>>
>>
>

Re: Syntax control code

[73budden .]

Hi! Where the document is found?

2018-01-06 3:53 GMT+03:00, Robert Goldman :
> I just pushed an edit of syntax-control.md in which I try to capture the
> terminology.
>
> Status: several Allegro failures break for me on test-syntax-control.
> Results from Linux:
>
> build/results/allegro8_64-test.text
> build/results/allegro8_64_s-test.text
> build/results/allegromodern8_64-test.text
> build/results/allegromodern8_64_s-test.text
> build/results/allegromodern_64-test.text
> build/results/allegromodern_64_s-test.text
>
> These failures seem to be due to NAMED-READTABLES not working properly
> on these platforms, rather than on anything ASDF itself does.
>
> Concern:  As I was reading over syntax-control.md, it was brought home
> to me that the ASDF shared syntax is initialized to the *initial syntax*
> on the host implementation, rather than the standard syntax of ANSI CL.
> My understanding is that this is done for backwards-compatibility with
> some QL systems that assume they have access to extended syntax from
> some implementation(s).  I'm concerned that this will create a
> maintenance headache going forward just so someone *else* can avoid
> making some minor clean-up.  Should we just suck it up and make the
> shared syntax start out with the initial syntax?  Why not break it now,
> and save ourselves trouble later?  Also, it seems like "initial syntax"
> is not well-defined, even on a single implementation, since ASDF might
> be loaded at arbitrary times, possibly after modifications to the
> "initial initial" readtable.  Finally, going forward, people will be
> yelling at *us* if implementations change their initial syntax.
>
> Unless there's a really important reason to keep this, I think we should
> kill it.
>
>