On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Robert Goldman rpgold...@sift.net wrote:
Zach Beane wrote:
Faré fah...@gmail.com writes:
femlisp raises an interesting issue: it has (setq
*READ-DEFAULT-FLOAT-FORMAT* 'double-float) in setup.lisp, which is
cancelled by the with-standard-io-syntax that I
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Zach Beane x...@xach.com wrote:
femlisp side-effects *READ-DEFAULT-FLOAT-FORMAT*, which means that
every system compiled after it will be treated differently than if it
were compiled before it — and once again, whoever writes the system
does not and cannot
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 2:00 PM, Anton Vodonosov avodono...@yandex.ru wrote:
Fare, if femlisp configures *read-default-float-format*
why does it fail with your ASDF change? Do you restore standard
CL syntax around every file compilation?
Yes I do, although I just committed a change to override
I suspect it's related to some bad shadowing of initialization function
in ECL, whereby the version from the old object file is called, instead
of the version from the new one.
Did you change something in MKCL regarding initialization functions,
e.g. using attributes to mark some functions
Fare Yes I do, although I just committed a change to override
Fare *read-default-float-format* to 'double-float, which I believe is
more
Fare useful.
I disagree that that is more useful. While I almost always use
doubles, there are lots of reasons to use singles. Just because I
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Zach Beane x...@xach.com wrote:
Faré fah...@gmail.com writes:
Once it's accepted that ASDF will enforce the syntax variables decided
This seems more like an if than a once to me.
Then please argue that. I for one fully agree that the big question
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Zach Beane x...@xach.com wrote:
Faré fah...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Zach Beane x...@xach.com wrote:
Faré fah...@gmail.com writes:
Once it's accepted that ASDF will enforce the syntax variables decided
This seems more like
regarding the recent discussions i'm generally baffled why it is at
all a question whether to make a build software deterministic or
not. in my view if there's anything in the global state that has an
effect on the building of a software, anything, then it's a bug.
I think one question is
by now the time on spent discussing this would have easily been enough
to fix all of them twice over, and to add a section to the top of the
manual, with bold, that lists the global state that ASDF guarantees
and isolates.
I've sent patches to all 16 libraries that depended on
: p-cos
no upgrade, no breakage.
If you can’t upgrade ASDF, you may also not be able to upgrade quicklisp. If
you can’t upgrade quicklisp, you may also not be able to get updates to
existing libraries. At least, it may be harder than necessary (like in the
pre-quicklisp, pre-asdf-install
(1) guaranteeing a value of *read-default-float-format*
and other syntax variables when compiling a library.
I still argue that (1) is essential for build determinism,
and enabling users to change syntax at the REPL.
Are you also considering the following use case?
- Assume I’m developing
I haven't checked recently, but in the past ASDF files have had significant
code even before the system definition. It was common to find conditionals
based on *features*, comments for users to select from a few customization
options, numbers being read, etc.
Once you have read the form, it
Dear CL hackers,
compile-file and load already bind *readtable*, which means that for
asdf itself to bind *readtable* should be a no-op in the common case,
and a BIG save for those who want to switch the readtable at the REPL.
In its current state, the syntax-control branch does just that, but
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 9:06 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
Faré wrote:
compile-file and load already bind *readtable*, which means that for
asdf itself to bind *readtable* should be a no-op in the common case,
and a BIG save for those who want to switch the readtable
I believe that with its massively scaled down functionality and
enhanced configurability,
my syntax-control is ready for merge before the 3.1 release:
* all it does in its default configuration is rebind *readtable* to
the value it had when loading asdf.
If you require asdf then use load-system
Dear Robert,
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 11:31 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
If you are interested in the current status, see the 'docs' topic branch.
You will see there some work products, particularly a marked up copy of
the old manual, with my thoughts about what needs to be
Should it be a release blocker, though? Lack of documentation for
exported functions is not a regression.
I will do some triage on the changes needed so that it does not hold up
the release excessively. I expect to get the manual to a good enough
for release state before all of the exported
On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
The documentation of LOAD-SOURCE-OP seems contradictory.
At first it says that loading source only (and never compiling) is not
workable.
But later it describes LOAD-SOURCE-OP as doing just exactly the thing
that
On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
I have just pushed to the docs topic branch a complete rewrite of the
recommendations for TEST-OP.
I think this rewrite better maintains abstraction, because the testing
methods are on the test library, rather than
On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
In the discussion of CLEAR-SYSTEM, I see the following parenthetical:
(It was once conceived that one should provide
a list of systems the recompilation of which to force
as the @code{:force} keyword argument to
Dear JCB,
I managed to compile MKCL from git, but only after I updated its ASDF.
Unless you have a good reason, I recommend you only include
a bootstrapped version of asdf.lisp in your source tree.
You should of course keep generating it from an asdf checkout,
and send us any local patch you
: Faré
: JCB
: JCB
I managed to compile MKCL from git, but only after I updated its ASDF.
I just did the following sequence on a fresh Ubuntu 13.10 x86 with proper
tools and libs installed without any incident:
git clone git://common-lisp.net/projects/mkcl/mkcl.git
cd mkcl
This suggests that one of the things you need to do is have tighter
control over the CL_SOURCE_REGISTRY
and ASDF_OUTPUT_TRANSLATIONS around this compilation, to prevent the
unwanted ASDF upgrade.
I have to admit that interference from the process environment was not on my
list of identified
Dear Lisp hackers,
apparently, Xach thinks the name package-system is a bad name for
the quick-build compatible extension to ASDF that I implemented and is
going to be released with ASDF 3.1 — see file package-system.lisp, its
use in lisp-interface-library, and the description in the ASDF manual
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Faré fah...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear Lisp hackers,
apparently, Xach thinks the name package-system is a bad name for
the quick-build compatible extension to ASDF that I implemented and is
going to be released with ASDF 3.1 — see file package-system.lisp, its
I’m jumping in late here, but why is this part of ASDF itself? I can see how
someone might want this as an extension but it seems like the kind of thing
that shouldn’t live in ASDF itself, IMO.
Shouldn’t ASDF’s goal be to make this sort of extension possible/easy but not
to actually
...@informatimago.com wrote:
On 16 Apr 2014, at 00:00, Faré fah...@gmail.com wrote:
Before the release is the best time for renaming things. If you have a
suggestion for a better name, now is the time to speak, not later.
fasciculus
(Since we have alexandria and cesarum, we could go
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
Faré wrote:
OK, so the main contender seem to be, without -system suffix:
one-package-per-file
Robert, are you alright with that name?
Do you insist on the shorter variant package-per-file ?
I can do
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 7:13 PM, Faré f...@tunes.org wrote:
I will still wait for comments, but unless a better proposal comes along
and/or Robert vouches for a different name, I will rename package-system to:
one-package-per-file
On the other hand, Jean-Philippe Paradis just proposed
Well, I'm hoping to hear from you about a choice between these two
names (or other proposals).
one-package-per-file
vs
package-inferred-system
I prefer package-inferred-system and package-derived-system, FWIW.
OK, so the top contender is now package-inferred-system.
Speak today, or
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 4:14 AM, Jean-Claude Beaudoin
jean.claude.beaud...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 1:26 AM, Jean-Claude Beaudoin
jean.claude.beaud...@gmail.com wrote:
I had to do this instead:
./test/run-tests.sh -u mkcl
...
Working on it...
Could you please apply the
Dear Robert,
maybe your shell doesn't like $() syntax and wants `` — so replace the
$$(...) with `...` (the $ is escaped by another $ at the Makefile
level). Or maybe it really doesn't like a newline, even escaped,
within its $$(), at which point you may have to either (1) put it all
in one long
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 10:53 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
For previous versions of ASDF, Faré has been providing a debian package,
cl-asdf.
I'd like a volunteer to take over the packaging process.
The more I mess with this, the less I feel like I know what I'm doing.
I
I'm inclined to think that figuring out how to load ASDF from the
cl-asdf debian package to override an ASDF that has been packaged with
your implementation is no easier than doing so from cl.net. Indeed, it
may actually be more complicated, since you have to figure out how to
load from
, they are discredited. Repeated
obvious flaws in your own, you keep the blind faith. Government saves!
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 8:57 AM, Kambiz Darabi dar...@m-creations.com wrote:
Hello,
On 2014-05-16 07:12 CEST, Faré fah...@gmail.com wrote:
That said, I can do the asdf debian package one last time
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Faré fah...@gmail.com wrote:
4- A good exercise in further bootstrapping ASDF would be convert
bin/asdf-builder to a trivial cl-launch script + a system asdf-build
(or meta-asdf? whatever), and the Makefile to a trivial wrapper that
invokes it (except
My latest procrastination was to convert the ASDF Makefile and
supporting build and test scripts to CL.
On the one hand, the Makefile didn't translate into asdf secondary
targets, like I expected: it's all regular CL functions, modulo some
slightly elaborate calling conventions so that the
don't need either of them. — Faré]
___
Asdf-devel mailing list
Asdf-devel@common-lisp.net
http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 5:28 AM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
Faré wrote:
Here's the patch I've committed on my local release branch, but
haven't pushed to common-lisp.net yet, pending maintainer approval.
That's fine with me; you have my blessing.
Kambiz, if you'd like
some days ago, which I
obviously didn't send and I also don't find in my drafts folder :(
So, sorry for the delay and here I go again:
On 2014-05-20 20:57 CEST, Faré fah...@gmail.com wrote:
I found that this magic command helps:
1- edit files in debian/ and debian/ only ... if you need
On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 3:28 AM, Kambiz Darabi dar...@m-creations.com wrote:
Trying to set up a build environment for the minimakefile branch, I also
had to hunt the dependencies.
Same dependencies.
It was already difficult for me using the bump script, but most of the
makefile required only
On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 9:03 PM, Anton Vodonosov avodono...@yandex.ru wrote:
It should be possible to use Quicklisp for build script dependencies
(except for lisp-invocation - I don't see it in Quicklisp so we will
need to provide it).
The proper thing to do in this case is file a bug on
minimakefile will have to wait. I don't see a pressing need to merge
it. It provides no new functionality, only an experiment with using
ASDF to enable CL to be used as a scripting langauge. That's nice, but
until it *eases* my development, instead of complicating it, I don't
expect to
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
My large system is broken, but I have not been able to diagnose the
problem. It is turning up *way* downstream. I get a type error where a
class is not getting the right METACLASS.
Is it possible to look at that
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
I was wondering about the :AROUND methods for OUTPUT-FILES and
INPUT-FILES, which are exported and which we invite programmers to
provide methods for.
I don't think this is necessarily a big deal: we explain pretty
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 7:13 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
I guess what seems funny about OUTPUT-FILES is that the main methods
have a return type that is *different* from the return type of the
generic function.
The main method should return two values:
1. A set of
I tried to run cl-launch with mkcl, and mkcl crashed during the
upgrade of asdf from 3.0.3.0.1 to 3.1.2:
echo '(in-package :fare-quasiquote) (format t ~A~% *package*)' | cl
-l mkcl -s fare-quasiquote-extras -f -
Error during command line arguments processing:
The index
Interestingly, uiop/common-lisp.lisp sets
clos::*redefine-class-in-place* in uiop/common-lisp — is the problem
due to your compiling asdf/defsystem separately, and bind r-c-i-p in
LOAD, so that this setting doesn't apply to asdf/defsystem?
At first, your solution looked like it wasn't working.
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
Dave Cooper wrote:
I think my issue is that I am not using the UIOP image dump facility.
This is because in Allegro CL we use thei built-in excl functions like
excl:generate-application --- it's not a matter of a
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 11:47 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
clear-configuration is the function you call
when configuration files may have been modified and
you want to invalidate any current configuration loaded from them.
All it does is call the functions in the
Cher JCB,
The whole fix is in MKCL's git repo master head. I tried it on my copy
of ASDF syntax-control branch head and it worked OK. Could you
please confirm that it also works for you?
I ran
cl -l mkcl -ip :ok
which worked with both asdf 3.1.2 and the syntax-control branch,
which is
On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 6:11 AM, Jean-Claude Beaudoin
jean.claude.beaud...@gmail.com wrote:
I dropped in ASDF 3.1.2 from the release tarball in the MKCL 1.1.9
source tree as a direct replacement of the currently bundled ASDF.
It compiled fine. The whole MKCL build completes and installs as
Dear Jean-Claude,
that's a pretty embarrassing bootstrap bug in ASDF indeed, that I
introduced in 3.1.0.4. Interesting that the test suite didn't find it.
Oops.
Bisecting things a bit, it seems to be a bug introduced in 3.1.0.104.
To test things:
v=3.1.0.103; ASDF_UPGRADE_TEST_TAGS=$v
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
Jean-Claude Beaudoin wrote:
Robert, I am under the impression that this is mostly your call, is it not?
That sounds right. I can make a 3.1.3 available. Unfortunately (for
ASDF, but not for me), I am going on
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
When following up discussion about bug 1335323, I stumbled across the
following paragraph in the manual:
When system definitions are loaded from @file{.asd} files,
a new scratch package is created for them to load
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 2:03 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
Thank you, Faré.
I have updated the manual and pushed that (not bothering with a new
version).
Can you push? I don't see the change.
Also, can you make a new release to fix the embarrassing bootstrap bug?
And can
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 9:58 PM, Anton Vodonosov avodono...@yandex.ru wrote:
All the asdf-tools dependencies are in Quicklisp now, just do
(ql:update-all-dists) (ql:update-client)
So now, people who use Quicklisp (unlike Robert) can get dependencies
installed
automatically by doing
I hadn't tested the minimakefile branch with quicklisp, so of course
it wasn't working. Fixed. All you need to bootstrap the asdf-tools is
a recent quicklisp (and possibly removing antique cl-ppcre packages
from debian that might take precedence).
I just realized that with quicklisp,
Dear Kambiz,
do you think it is now obsolete to create a test git repo which contains
the dependencies as git subtrees?
You should ask Robert -- he's the one who's to decide, these days.
Now that the minimakefile branch is *tested* to work with quicklisp
correctly, I see *less* need for that.
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Dave Cooper david.coo...@genworks.com wrote:
I'm not sure how much this matters because it's mostly a backward
compatibility issue with something which is a relatively new feature anyway,
but
(asdf:output-file[s] 'asdf:monolithic-fasl-op ...)
no longer
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
Faré wrote:
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Dave Cooper david.coo...@genworks.com
wrote:
I'm not sure how much this matters because it's mostly a backward
compatibility issue with something which is a relatively
Dear Robert,
I have two local branches with these patches. May I merge into master?
The input-string function was added for symmetry while hacking
cl-launch, though I ended up not using it, to remain compatible with
older versions of uiop.
The uiop:getenv bug was discovered while fixing
On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
Faré wrote:
Dear Robert,
I have two local branches with these patches. May I merge into master?
The input-string function was added for symmetry while hacking
cl-launch, though I ended up not using it, to remain
On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 6:23 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
Faré wrote:
I'm finding the run-program tests fail for me on Mac OS X, on both SBCL
and Allegro (haven't tried other lisps yet), which will probably keep me
from addressing the minimakefile yet AGAIN). :-(
Oops
On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 10:54 PM, Dave Cooper david.coo...@genworks.com wrote:
Hi, I know this has been discussed, but what is currently the best practice
for registering a preloaded system after loading Quicklisp? That is, I have
a pre-built image with some Quicklisp/ASDF systems in it, which
-systems*)
(cons nil (make-instance 'asdf:system :name system
But I think this is effectively what I want to achieve here.
On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Dave Cooper david.coo...@genworks.com
wrote:
Faré wrote:
Using asdf 3.1, you can use *immutable-systems
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Jan Moringen
jmori...@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
Hi,
I think there is a bug in the operate :around t t method.
I looked at this in the SBCL source tree and couldn't find ASDF's
upstream git repository on common-lisp.net, so this may already be fixed
.
I'll have to study the test-program.script a bit before attempting a test
case.
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 7:31 PM, Faré fah...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear Dave,
your patch looks great except that it introduces tabs.
Please no tabs in ASDF. At least SBCL hates them.
Also, if you can contrive
as
register-preloaded-system as part of register-immutable-system. It tries to
preserve version information according to what Faré recommended.
It also patches clear-system and clear-defined-system so as to prevent
clearing any systems which occur in the *immutable-systems* table. In the
case
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 10:36 AM, Faré fah...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info
wrote:
Thanks to both of you for your work on this patch.
I'm going to hold off on applying any patches, though, until there's a
test case.
Dave, I
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Dave Cooper david.coo...@genworks.com wrote:
What about clear-defined-systems (plural)?
This is exported functionality and it calls clear-defined-system.
Should it be changed to clear-systems and made to call clear-system, or kept
the same and made to call
-René ÐVB Rideau •ReflectionCybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
Science is a cooperative process based on
an attitude of logic, imagination and doubt.
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Dave Cooper david.coo...@genworks.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Faré fah...@gmail.com wrote
Dear Geoff,
If you are still interested in becoming ASDF maintainer, which I hope
you are, or even just developer, here is a post linking to some
suggested things to read about the state of ASDF:
http://fare.livejournal.com/176185.html
I am still interested, even enthusiastic. I will read
At ILC 2014, one discussed show-stopper for using CL as a scripting
language was startup time. Indeed, right now, when used as a script
rather than as a dumped image, CL takes a lot of time to start:
time ( sbcl --noinform --eval '(require :asdf)' --eval '(progn
(asdf:initialize-source-registry)
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 2:38 AM, Mark Evenson even...@panix.com wrote:
On 21 Aug 2014, at 02:36, Faré fah...@gmail.com wrote:
[…]
The trick here is in this new stop-at-asd flag, which here defaults to
t and isn't configurable, but which should default to nil and be
configurable
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.net
wrote:
If I understand correctly, the proposal is to require configuration only
for
the special case of wanting faster start up, and absent that,
configuration
will be as before, since optimization for scripting is the
On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 7:45 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
I have tried to pull all the dependencies for ASDF building into the
repo. I have done this primarily using git submodules, but also had to
pull in cl-ppcre as source, since it doesn't seem to be available as a
git
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 9:27 AM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
Thanks. Please pull an update, and have a look. I replaced the local
copy with a git submodule.
Looks like it works for me.
You should update the README with instructions on how to use this feature,
i.e. do git
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 2:10 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
Quick PS: what mechanism do you think should be used to tweak this
setting? Should presumably be something easy to specify (i.e., not a
config file), so that one can quickly start a lisp script, without
messing up
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
Once again, where under a hierarchy the .asd files are is ultimately
the knowledge and responsibility of the curators of the respective
source trees, not of the end-user. Therefore, the absence of recursion
should
Actually, the asdf initialization routine could unconditionally
add the asdf tree to the path: either it's present or not, but it
doesn't hurt to try,
and so no need to export ASDF_DEVEL_SOURCE_REGISTRY, then.
I'm not entirely sure about this. Here's my question: if someone is
developing
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 7:39 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
Has there been any more progress on this front, since 11 August? That
was the last email I saw on the subject.
Dave and I had a brief conversation about it at ILC 2014. My advice
was to modify test-bundle.script and
Thanks. BTW, isn't my ROOT_DIR definition a good replacement for your
sourceDirectory? I believe the latter could fail if the Makefile is
invoked from another directory
sourceDirectory is actually gwking's. Did five years already go by?
But to answer your question, make -C .../asdf/
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Ben Hyde bh...@pobox.com wrote:
Would changing (:tree path) so it accepts an optional argument be less
adhoc?
Possibly (:tree path key (depth nil)
(don-not-recure-after-asdf-encountered nil))
I of course thought about this, but it's the wrong thing:
the
I saw that. This doesn't help when asdf is in the source-registry,
though (which is the recommended way of having an asdf upgrade: just
having its source in the source-registry, e.g. in ~/common-lisp/asdf/)
Hm. And we have to have the asdf *tree* in the source-registry instead
of only
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 7:06 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
That said, we could also move the defsystem files to a defsystem/
subdirectory, making the systems siblings, and being happy that way.
So defsystem/ would contain asdf.asd, pointing to files in ../ and
uiop.asd
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 3:54 AM, Attila Lendvai
attila.lend...@gmail.com wrote:
Windows? Are .lnk files supported on all Windows implementations? Meh.
FTR, windoze supports proper symlinks on NTFS since Vista.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS_symbolic_link
And since that's been standard
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Ben Hyde bh...@pobox.com wrote:
My cl-launch scripts can take one second.
I can trim a half second off that with a disk-cache[2] of *source-registry*.
I'm jealous. Your machine is almost 25% faster than mine.
[2] A proof of concept disk cache...
The cache should ideally be per source-registry entry;
and managed by the same entity that manages said entry.
Thus, I was thinking of an optional second form
in cl-source-registry.conf file.
Or a separate .cl-source-registry.cache file.
I saw that. i’m ambivalent about the complexity.
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 9:49 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
Now is the time to speak up if there's any reason I should *not* merge
the experimental-submodules branch, which will make ASDF freestanding by
pulling in its build dependencies.
I'll probably merge this and push
Any insta-theories for where other half second comes from?
If you mean the second half of cl-launch's startup time, I fear it
might be a combination of shell and CL compilation overhead, but I
admit I haven't tried timing where the time is going. You're welcome
to investigate. At some point,
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Ben Hyde bh...@pobox.com wrote:
get’n off topic … scripting isn’t asdf ... should find a room.
No, YOU go first!
not long for this world. cleaning shaved 4 seconds of the run time
soon I can remove that damn link farm.
Oh, how did you shave it? Was it a
Actually, I believe git submodule is a *huge* plus in this case, since
it means you can choose whether or not you want to checkout the
dependencies. I for one don't usually want them to interfere with my
otherwise checked out dependencies.
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •ReflectionCybernethics•
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 9:00 AM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
Kambiz Darabi wrote:
I don't know how many people are devs and how many people just 'users'
in the sense that they clone the repo and use it without caring about
the dependencies of asdf.
But your point is
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 9:30 AM, Robert P. Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
I don't see that as something substantially more complicated, except maybe
that there might be a need for two tarballs, with or without dependencies.
I'm not sure that's true. Have we checked that the make scripts
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Robert Goldman rpgold...@sift.net wrote:
Robert P. Goldman wrote:
The minimakefile help lists:
archive alias for command make-and-publish-archive
but make-and-publish-archive is not listed as a command in the help, nor
in the makefile. Is
Rideau •ReflectionCybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
Hi! I'm a signature virus. Copy me into your sig file and help me spread!
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Faré f...@tunes.org wrote:
Any insta-theories for where other half second comes from?
If you mean the second half of cl-launch's startup
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:49 AM, Ralf Mattes r...@mh-freiburg.de wrote:
Hello list,
I just stumbled overthe following strangeness [1]:
I've some code in directory foo that contains two asdf files, foo.asd
and foo-test.asd, the later contains the following definition:
(defsystem
Dear Anton, dear Robert, dear Common Lisp hackers,
since 3.1.3 in last July there have been many minor bug fixes to ASDF
and UIOP (plus enhancements for ECL, GCL, LispWorks, MKCL), a
.cl-source-registry.cache feature for faster script startup, and
slight documentation improvements. I believe it's
On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Mirko Vukovic mirko.vuko...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Does uiop/os have a function for setting environment variables? I
have not found any in ASDF 3.1
I'm not convinced this can be done portably on a large enough number
of implementations. Also, the only reason to
801 - 900 of 1393 matches
Mail list logo
