Well, remove-method could be used in some cases,
but it doesn't by far cover all cases:
1- sometimes, the function signature changed;
key arguments were added (or removed?),
a function was made generic that wasn't before,
or generic no more that was before.
Only fmakunbound can handle these
Dear Robert,
it looks like the issue is that you loaded your methods
to extend ASDF before upgrading ASDF itself, which won't work.
Upgrading ASDF includes a FMAKUNBOUND on several functions,
including PERFORM, which indeed UNTRACE's them on many implementations.
ASDF 3 will always try to
On 2/6/13 Feb 6 -5:42 AM, Faré wrote:
Dear Robert,
it looks like the issue is that you loaded your methods
to extend ASDF before upgrading ASDF itself, which won't work.
Upgrading ASDF includes a FMAKUNBOUND on several functions,
including PERFORM, which indeed UNTRACE's them on many
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 3:48 PM, Robert Goldman rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
ASDF 3 will always try to upgrade itself before any operation,
precisely to avoid squashing your methods in the middle of the operation,
which would be far worse.
I'm afraid that this behavior needs refinement.
Just a question for understanding this better: CLOS provides clean ways to
update methods with newer versions. Why do you use fmakunbound instead? Is this
to stay backwards-compatible? Would it be a good idea to switch to a CLOS-based
solution in the future to prevent such problems?
I'm
