Subject says it all.
-T.
___
asdf-devel mailing list
asdf-devel@common-lisp.net
http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel
[ Reply to asdf-devel only because it does not affect SBCL, or CCL. ]
Gary King writes:
> Is there any current mechanism to get the latest (and therefore one
> hopes greatest) version of ASDF into SBCL / Allegro CL / Clozure CL,
> etc.? If not, I think there should be. What would it look li
When I use :FORCE, in most cases I do want to recompile solely the
specified system, not all its dependencies.
In my ideal world, :FORCE T would recompile the specified system only,
and :FORCE :ALL would recompile it along its dependencies.
Of course that would be backwards-incompatible, so per
Gary King writes:
> Hi Tobias,
>
> I'm forwarding this to the asdf-devel list and will answer it later
> today from there.
Please send a copy to the cclan list. I just submitted asdf-devel to
gmane.org but it usually takes some time because the newsgroups are
created manually.
-T.
--
Diese
Gary King writes:
> Hi Tobias,
>
> I agree with you.
>
> There was a brief and inconclusive discussion of this recently. I'll
> resurrect it and make a summary soon (by this weekend) and then we can
> move forward!
You've probably been busy. Any news?
-T.
I think it's bitten pretty much all of us that we at least once tried to
push a non-directory-designating filename to *CENTRAL-REGISTRY*.
It's a common pitfalls for newcomers.
Couldn't ASDF signal a warning when it encounters such a thing while
grovelling through the registry?
-T.
_
Richard M Kreuter writes:
> "Tobias C. Rittweiler" writes:
>
> > I think it's bitten pretty much all of us that we at least once tried to
> > push a non-directory-designating filename to *CENTRAL-REGISTRY*.
> >
> > It's a common pitfalls for
Richard M Kreuter writes:
> Wouldn't it be more user-friendly to coerce such pathnames to ones that
> denote directory names?
Small addendum to my previous mail:
Even in the case of automatic coercing, I think ASDF should signal a
style-warning for educational purposes.
-T.
Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll writes:
> What I would like to ask CL developers is to begin shipping regression
> tests with their libraries, and perhaps agree on an standard so that
> one can programatically check whether a library builds or not. This
> feature could be even included in ASDF, asdf-insta
Robert Goldman writes:
> Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote:
>
> > There's (ASDF:OOS 'ASDF:TEST-OP ), and on very recent revisions
> > even (ASDF:TEST-SYSTEM ) as an abbeviation.
> >
> > I don't think this has been properly documented in the manual of ASDF
Nikodemus Siivola writes:
> 2009/8/5 Robert Goldman :
>
> > Part of the problem with test-op is that the desired behavior has not
> > been specified by the ASDF community. Because of the nature of ASDF, it
> > is impossible for
> >
> > (asdf:test-system )
> >
> > to return a value indicating whet
Faré writes:
> Sorry to parasite this mailing-list, but I'm trying to design the
> testing aspect of XCVB right now. The constraint is that we want to be
> able to use make as a backend, and that test results should thus be
> reified as files if we want to avoid re-running already-computed
> tests
%DEFINE-COMPONENT-INLINE-METHODS contains the following LOOP form:
(loop for data = rest then (cddr data)
while data
for key = (first data)
for value = (second data)
...)
However, if you look at LOOP's BNF in the specification, you'll see that
termination clauses *must*
Nick Levine writes:
> Hi.
>
> Can anyone point me to a list of which lisps do / don't run ASDF? Or
> is it believed that all CL implementations work with ASDF?
Since a few months, ASDF uses the long form of DEFINE-METHOD-COMBINATION
which ABCL does not currently support. They're using an older ve
"Tobias C. Rittweiler" writes:
> When I use :FORCE, in most cases I do want to recompile solely the
> specified system, not all its dependencies.
>
> In my ideal world, :FORCE T would recompile the specified system only,
> and :FORCE :ALL would recompile it along its dep
I hate that I have to push a commonly shared directory onto
*central-registry* for each implementation and thus have to know the
rc files of every implementation.
(I was recently bidden by some classic rm -rf ~, and had to redo all
these kinds of infrastructure woes.)
Would anyone mind ASDF comi
james anderson writes:
> On 2009-09-23, at 22:03 , Faré wrote:
>
> > I use
> > ~/.local/share/common-lisp/systems/
> > /usr/local/share/common-lisp/systems/
> > /usr/share/common-lisp/systems/
> >
> > YMMV.
> >
> > What about an ASDF_PATH shell variable to be taken from getenv the
> > first time a
Faré writes:
> What about a ASDF_PATH, or better, a COMMON_LISP_PATH ? Hopefully the
> latter, with a semantics that can be shared between ASDF and XCVB, and
> that allows recursion through directories instead of or in addition to
> having everything in one directory with symlinks.
Such behaviour
Visiting an .asd file and using C-c C-k to compile-and-load would make
the system properly available in past.
This does not seem to work since a few revisions. It now tries to load
the files specified in the system relative to the current working
directory.
When I C-c C-l, that is just load with
Robert Goldman writes (2009-Jul-09):
(Replying to an older posting,)
> I'd rather have us handle slot-unbound on those optional parts of the
> system instead of stuffing a bunch of NILs in there.
Well, if you do not initialize slots with NIL, how can people know when
it's safe to call an accesso
Gary King writes:
> ## default value for *central-registry*
>
> ...
>
> * a `!` will be replaced by the default value (see below) so
>that it is easy to extend the path rather than just
>replacing it.
Is this really necessary?
> ## configuration file
>
> When ASDF starts, it will:
>
>
Robert Goldman writes:
> An alternative solution would be to provide a :stream or :filename init
> argument for the test-op operation class and bind a dynamic variable
> around every perform, making the stream or filename available for
> writing
To me, the most interesting advantage that I se
Robert Goldman writes:
> 2. Returning a single operation isn't enough, is it? For example, if I
> have system X, with sub-systems A, B, and C, I may be testing A, B, and
> C, so my traversal would have to gather up the three subsidiary test-op
> entities and either package them into the parent t
Robert Goldman writes:
> Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote:
>> Robert Goldman writes:
>>
>>> 2. Returning a single operation isn't enough, is it? For example, if I
>>> have system X, with sub-systems A, B, and C, I may be testing A, B, and
>>> C, so
I think GwKing uses automatically generated documentation for his
libraries. Gary, do you use some hook into ASDF for that?
In my experience, you always have to toggle a few switches for each
project (name, version number, download url, etc), and I'd like to have
a general interface that hides th
Faré writes:
> Gary obviously doesn't have enough time to maintain ASDF and commit
> (or reject) patches as fast as they come.
Which patches? Hasn't it so far been mostly fluff talk, no action?
-T.
___
asdf-devel mailing list
asdf-devel@common-lisp
Robert Goldman writes:
> Faré wrote:
>
> > Maybe ASDF is the wrong place to try to standardize testing infrastructure?
>
> This is the conclusion I have reached, as well. I was hoping that some
> very weak standard could be arrived at that would make the test-op more
> generally useful to people
Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll writes:
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 12:00 AM, Robert Goldman wrote:
[for the record; the topmost paragraph came from me:]
> > > In particular because it's my impression that the problems have been
> > > over-stated.
>
> I think so. And this is indicated by the following par
Robert Goldman writes:
> Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll wrote:
>
> > You are just imposing too much complexity. If I want to test package
> > Cl-UNICODE, I do nont want to test FLEXI-STREAMS or U-SOCKETS. Tests
> > should be atomic and not generate a tree of actions like ASDF does not
> > for everythin
"Tobias C. Rittweiler" writes:
> What if we start with the simple case of only carring one bit of
> meta-information (successp), merging is nothing more than ORing together
> the results.
Bah, s/OR/AND/
-T.
___
asdf-devel mail
Faré writes:
> > > --- old-split-sequence/split-sequence.lisp 2009-10-22
> > > 20:10:35.110170150 -0400
> > > +++ new-split-sequence/split-sequence.lisp 2009-10-22
> > > 20:10:35.114171499 -0400
> > > @@ -50,6 +50,8 @@
> > > ;;; * (split-sequence #\; ";oo;bar;ba;" :start 1 :end 9)
> > >
Robert Goldman writes:
> Fare wrote:
>
> > > Do we need a :after method to restore the old settings? I'm not sure
> > > how to do that actually, since I don't believe there's a portable way to
> > > record them. Do you have thoughts about this?
> > >
> > (rpg replied to me in private but I'm Cc'
"Tobias C. Rittweiler" writes:
> I think GwKing uses automatically generated documentation for his
> libraries. Gary, do you use some hook into ASDF for that?
>
> In my experience, you always have to toggle a few switches for each
> project (name, version number, downloa
This feature request is now logged as
https://bugs.launchpad.net/asdf/+bug/479478
-T.
___
asdf-devel mailing list
asdf-devel@common-lisp.net
http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel
"Tobias C. Rittweiler"
writes:
> When I use :FORCE, in most cases I do want to recompile solely the
> specified system, not all its dependencies.
>
> In my ideal world, :FORCE T would recompile the specified system only,
> and :FORCE :ALL would recompile it along its dep
I want to run a test suite on an implementation I'm not currently
working in. For example, TEST-OP could take an :IMPLEMENTATION argument
(with one possible value being :ALL to test all "registered"
implementations -- whatever "registered" means.)
Fare nicely collected sexps describing how to do
As far as I'm told (and that matches my experience), ASDF does not recompile
the current system if a dependent system changed, unless of course :FORCE T
is specified.
This is logged as
https://bugs.launchpad.net/asdf/+bug/479522
-T.
___
asdf-dev
Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll writes:
> When I find time, in a week or so, I will try to produce a set of
> patches for the following things:
> - A new function that creates a sorted list of module dependencies
> wrapping around TRAVERSE This function should produce the same result
> irrespectively of w
Robert Goldman writes:
> [As an aside, I'm intrigued that you are using RT --- we gave up on it
> eventually because it's state is all global, so that we were never
> comfortable that stuff we set up to test in one system would not clash
> with tests in other systems]
For my needs so far, I a
(defun coerce-name (name)
(typecase name
(component (component-name name))
(symbol (string-downcase (symbol-name name)))
(string name)
(t (sysdef-error "~@" name
I first thought this was some bad kludge to support modern-mode. But
vc-annotate told me that was introduced by N
Thomas Bartscher writes:
> Why are warnings of asdf put into *standard-output*?
> Wouldn't it be easier to put those into something like *asdf-warnigs*? This
> way
> users of asdf could redirect those wherever they want.
That's a pet peeve of RPG, in fact. I suggest to log that feature
request
Robert Goldman writes:
> Similarly, I would prefer to have ASDF not fall into the SLIME trap.
> SLIME configuration seems to involve mastering an ever-changing number
> of contribs to get the features you really want
Slime is not a good example of a contrib system for various
reasons. Though
Daniel Herring
writes:
> On Wed, 2 Dec 2009, Faré wrote:
>
>> 2009/12/2 Robert Goldman :
>>> I should actually have been specific about something else:
>>>
>>> If we prefer spaces to tabs (and I will not attempt to stack my
>>> eloquence and vituperation against jwz's), we should probably stick t
"Tobias C. Rittweiler" writes:
> I can recommend to put the following into your .emacs
>
> (add-hook 'lisp-mode-hook
> #'(lambda ()
> (setq whitespace-style 'color)
> (setq whitespace-chars '(trailing in
Faré writes:
> Tobias, do you want to have the commit bit, so you may check in fixes
> to the bugs you reported?
Thanks for the offer, but I do not actually know much about ASDF, and
I'd rather spend my time on different projects. :-)
-T.
___
asdf-
At the moment *ASDF-REVISION* is a DEFVAR which won't be reset on
reloading. The attached patch makes it a DEFPARAMETER, so
*ASDF-REVISION* will reflect the correct version after a self-upgrade.
-T.
diff --git a/asdf.lisp b/asdf.lisp
index 100b8c9..ea1cd1e 100644
--- a/asdf.lisp
+++ b/asdf.lis
Faré wrote
> 2009/12/21 Samium Gromoff
>> Fare,
>>
>> Please consider the patch in the 'missing-definition' branch in
>>
>> git://git.feelingofgreen.ru/asdf
>>
> Applied in my development repo, master branch:
>http://common-lisp.net/project/xcvb/git/asdf.git
>
> Candidate for immediate rele
Hi Gary,
What are the required steps to change the Website?
-T.
___
asdf-devel mailing list
asdf-devel@common-lisp.net
http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel
The code in question is
(multiple-value-bind (output warnings-p failure-p)
(apply #'compile-file source-file :output-file output-file
(compile-op-flags operation))
(when warnings-p
(case (operation-on-warnings operation)
(:warn (warn
"~@"
Christophe Rhodes writes:
> "Tobias C. Rittweiler" writes:
>
> > I don't like that behaviour at all for the following reasons:
>
> I do. (Not that I have a vote, but I think there is some value in
> binary tools, which fail hard when things go wrong). Also
Robert Brown
writes:
> ASDF is behaving in a way I find mysterious. Maybe I've found a
> bug, but more likely I just don't understand ASDF dependencies.
>
> To demonstrate the problem, create the three files below.
>
> ==
> bug.asd
> ==
>
> (cl:in-package #:common-lisp-user)
Faré writes:
> I've just released ASDF 1.501 in the official repository, now with all
> the source registry configuration that I previously discussed. It's
> currently documented in its own file README.source-registry, rather
> than in the general manual asdf.texinfo, as it should be. Patch
> wel
Faré <...> writes:
> My plan for ASDF 1.600 is to rename the (recently) builtin
> asdf-binary-locations to asdf-output-locations and make a few
> incompatible changes to it.
> * These changes will allow for configuration through an API similar to
> the one I introduced for the source-registry in 1
"Tobias C. Rittweiler" <...> writes:
> I'll do so. The PS is README.asdf-output-locations written by Fare.
>
> -T.
>
> PS.
>
> =
> ASDF Output Locations
> =
>
> This file specifies how ASDF stores &quo
Robert Goldman writes:
>
>>
>>> In the spirit of ASDF, we should be writing output-files methods and
>>> then allowing your code to shuffle them, but that use-case seems to
>>> break down a bit here.
>>>
>>> Consider providing an asdf system definition for a web site. You want
>>> to specif
james anderson writes:
> good morning;
Hi James!
> Are these additions necessary? In this form?
> I had wanted to propose a patch to one method and thought it
> appropriate to update before offering the diff for review.
> I now have 1.502 and observe, that `asdf.lisp`, which had 56,684 as
>
james anderson writes:
> > 5. asdf-output-locations
> >
> > a. desirable?
> > b. contrib versus integral
> > c. configuration
>
> i would very much like it to be an optional, configurable
> contribution rather than part of the core implementation.
I have sympathy with making it option
* How about adding a TEST-OP to ASDF's asd?
* (asdf::version-satisfies (asdf:asdf-version)
(asdf:asdf-version))
may be a trivial test case for version-satisfies.
It's not obvious how to add test cases.
-T.
___
Although the way to extend operations by additional initargs is somewhat
cumbersome, it's possible. Unfortunately, the sugar forms LOAD-SYSTEM,
COMPILE-SYSTEM, and TEST-SYSTEM do not take additional initargs.
-T.
diff --git a/asdf.lisp b/asdf.lisp
index 92e7f6e..3f230d5 100644
--- a/asdf.lisp
Current ECL HEAD comes with asdf version "1.604", but trying to load
upstreams asdf.lisp won't work because of
"A package with the name ASDF-EXTENSIONS already exists."
Indeed, CLHS DEFPACKAGE says
If one of the supplied :nicknames already refers to an existing
package, an error of type p
Robert Goldman writes:
> On 2/24/10 Feb 24 -5:54 AM, Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote:
>>
>> Although the way to extend operations by additional initargs is somewhat
>> cumbersome, it's possible. Unfortunately, the sugar forms LOAD-SYSTEM,
>> COMPILE-SYSTEM, and TE
Robert Goldman
writes:
> On 2/24/10 Feb 24 -9:00 AM, Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote:
>> Robert Goldman writes:
>>
>>> On 2/24/10 Feb 24 -5:54 AM, Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Although the way to extend operations by additional ini
Faré writes:
> Thanks to Tobias for his several bug reports. I committed fixes to the issues,
> building my own ensure-package (in a labels in cl-user, because we don't
> have a package in which to do a defun yet).
There's another thing bugging me:
Could we add a PERFORM to swank.asd to muffle
Faré writes:
> Dear James,
>
>> i have reformulated the test cases and run them through several
>> implementations.[0]
>>
> Thanks a lot!
>
>> 1. i had thought (eg. [1]) that abcl and asdf were compatible. is
>> there some special version involved? the cl.net release failed to
>> load.[2]
>>
> Oh
* README should say how to build the manual
* That said, how is the user supposed to build the manual?
There does not seem to be any rule for it in the Makefile.
* texipdf asdf.texinfo resulted in an error; an asdf.pdf was produced
nontheless. See PS for transcript.
* the manual should per
Robert Goldman
writes:
> On 3/19/10 Mar 19 -4:11 PM, Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote:
>
> > * the manual should perhaps start with a "What's new" section which
> > mostly contains links to the appropriate pages.
>
> Please launchpad this one with a description
Faré writes:
> The manual already has a "What has changed between ASDF 1 and ASDF 2?"
> section, with the following subsections:
> @subsection ASDF can portably name files inside systems and components
> @subsection Output translations
> @subsection Source Registry Configuration
> @subsection Usu
Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll
writes:
> This is an idea that has been long floating in the back of my mind, and was
> brought back to life by these comments
>http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.lisp/msg/f99a69797eda1caf
>
> The problem is that many people use *.asd files to do things like buil
Robert Goldman writes:
> OK, I've looked at this, and I'm afraid I am not going to take this on
> in its current form. If someone else would be so kind as to wrangle the
> markdown and grok the scripts, that's fine.
>
> If after some time, no one else expresses a willingness to do this, then
> I
Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll writes:
> Now a couple of examples.
>
> Suppose you have an ASDF system which is made of many sources with several
> dependencies. I assume the system does not rely on other resources
> (additional files, etc), but this could be extended.
>
> If you want to build a single F
Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll
writes:
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Tobias C. Rittweiler
> wrote:
>
>> Do people want something like that? Dear, yes! For example, Zach Beane's
>> buildapp found great resonance:
>>
>> http://www.xach.com/lisp/buildapp/
Robert Goldman
writes:
> On 4/4/10 Apr 4 -9:50 PM, Faré wrote:
>>> I would in order prefer the following:
>>>
>>> 1. disable output-translations by default.
>>>
>> I think we can't do that, because of things like system-installed source code
>> and users who use both clisp and ecl (that share th
I was just bitten by a duplicate-name condition. It was on ASDF1, but
the code still seems to be exactly the same in ASDF2.
Please add a proper error message to that condition.
I first thought there are two systems with the same name, but it
actually complains about two files with the same name
Quite a few libraries come with reader hacks. They usually
come with a ENABLE-FOO-SYNTAX function. I'd like those
libraries to optionally depend on the named-readtables
library, and define a named readtable that includes their
hacks. So users can just use (IN-READTABLE FOO:SYNTAX)
on a per-file ba
In article
,
Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll
wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 10:13 AM, Tobias C Rittweiler
> wrote:
>
> > Now I'm wondering how good that solution is.
> >
>
> Bad. I already spoke about why I am against reader conditionalization in
> ASDF files.
In article
,
Faré wrote:
> Dear Tobias,
>
> I personally think this "weakly-depends-on" is a horrible mess.
>
> If you want FOO, require FOO. If you want FOO+READTABLE, require
> FOO+READTABLE.
>
> And so have two systems FOO and FOO+READTABLE. I think that's what the
> dwim.hu guys now do.
In article
,
Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll
wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 1:07 PM, Tobias C Rittweiler
> wrote:
>
> > The parts you left out did not talk about reader conditionalization
> > in ASD(F) files. So I'm confused by what you mean exactly.
> >
>
In article <1275145919.15345.10.ca...@seth-laptop>,
Seth Burleigh wrote:
> Alright, so this is definitely a bug in something, it is reproducable
> 100% of the time on sbcl 1.0.38 on ubuntu 10.04
>
> I compile celtk (from here http://github.com/kennytilton/celtk) and it
> gives me a compile-op
Myself wrote:
> Grep the output for "WARNING"; on SBCL, a warning
> will result in an ASDF compilation failure.
>
> Just by skimming through it, I saw one type mismatch warning,
> one of those annoying DEFPACKAGE warnings, and an annoying
> CFFI DEFCTYPE warning.
>
> Your options are to change t
What is the way to get a textual representation of
the plan of a system?
I would have thought that this is what ASDF:EXPLAIN
is for, but grepping through asdf.lisp did not make
me believe that's true.
Also, is there some fundamental reason why
(asdf:explain 'asdf:compile-op :system-name)
cou
Hi there!
Thanks to the ASDF maintainers. I just visited ASDF's website
on common-lisp.net since a long time, and it makes a nicely
maintained impression! Well done.
I have the following issues:
* The rather old ASDF version that I'm using ("2.010") does
not seem to be able to cope with mu
In article <4fbe3bc7.7090...@sift.info>,
Robert Goldman
wrote:
> On 5/24/12 May 24 -4:13 AM, Tobias C Rittweiler wrote:
> > Hi there!
> >
> > Thanks to the ASDF maintainers. I just visited ASDF's website
> > on common-lisp.net since a long time
82 matches
Mail list logo
