Discussing the Comprehensive Common Lisp Archive Net

Gary King | 5 Oct 2008 00:42

removed load-preferences support from ASDF

As was discussed several months ago, I have removed load-preferences  
support from ASDF

2007-10-04 10:55  gwking <at> metabang.com

	Removed preference loading machinery completely. Also removed
	the following test files that tested the machinery.

	* test/test-preferences-1.lisp
	* test/test-preferences-1.script
	* test/test-preferences-system-1.asd
	* test/test-preferences-system-load.lisp
	* test/test-preferences-system-test.lisp
	* test/test6.script
	* test/test7.script

--
Gary Warren King, metabang.com
Cell: (413) 559 8738
Fax: (206) 338-4052
gwkkwg on Skype * garethsan on AIM

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/

Gary King | 5 Oct 2008 21:48

small patch for asdf output

The patch below moves asdf status output into a single function, asdf- 
message, and uses this to print whatever ASDF prints.

It also moves a comment about CMUCL out into a separate function and  
uses enough-namestring when not running on CMUCL.

If no-one has objections, I'll commit in a few days.

Index: asdf.lisp
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/cclan/asdf/asdf.lisp,v
retrieving revision 1.129
diff -u -w -r1.129 asdf.lisp
--- asdf.lisp	4 Oct 2008 22:41:04 -0000	1.129
+++ asdf.lisp	5 Oct 2008 19:46:02 -0000
 <at>  <at>  -150,6 +150,10  <at>  <at> 
  (define-modify-macro appendf (&rest args)
    append "Append onto list")

+(defun asdf-message (message &rest args)
+  (declare (dynamic-extent args))
+  (apply #'format *verbose-out* message args))
+
  ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
  ;; classes, condiitons

 <at>  <at>  -399,6 +403,15  <at>  <at> 
            (package (try counter) (try counter)))
           (package package))))

(Continue reading)

Gary King | 8 Oct 2008 01:45

in-order-to and/or do-first

Can anyone recall why we have both in-order-to and do-first? Doesn't  
in-order-to subsume do-first?

thanks,
--
Gary Warren King, metabang.com
Cell: (413) 559 8738
Fax: (206) 338-4052
gwkkwg on Skype * garethsan on AIM

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/

Richard M Kreuter | 8 Oct 2008 03:22

Re: in-order-to and/or do-first

Gary King writes:
> Can anyone recall why we have both in-order-to and do-first? Doesn't  
> in-order-to subsume do-first?

This came up a little more than a year ago:

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.cclan.general/674

--
Richard

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/

Andreas Fuchs | 8 Oct 2008 09:50

Re: in-order-to and/or do-first

On Oct 8, 2008, at 2:22, Richard M Kreuter wrote:
> Gary King writes:
>> Can anyone recall why we have both in-order-to and do-first? Doesn't
>> in-order-to subsume do-first?
>
> This came up a little more than a year ago:
>
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.cclan.general/674

The separation between the two as it is right now is used by what I'll  
call compilation dependencies: Compilation of file A will trigger  
compilation of dependent file B if load-op is performed on the system  
containing them. I tried to pry in-order-to and do-first apart once,  
then just gave up and left things as they were, because I could not  
figure out how to guarantee that compilation of dependent files  
happens before loading in this case.

HTH,
--

-- 
Andreas Fuchs, (http://|im:asf <at> |mailto:asf <at> )boinkor.net, antifuchs

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/

Gary King | 8 Oct 2008 16:12

rfc - delay the parsing of system components

I just finished a rough cut of an ASDF overall that makes three  
largish changes:

1. delays the parsing of system components until needed by traverse.  
In particular, this means that the :components clause of defsystem  
form happens after that system's dependencies have been loaded rather  
than when the ASD file itself is loaded.

2. rewrites traverse as a set of methods that immediately call perform  
(rather than building up a list of perform actions that  are then  
called in operate).

3. does away with :do-first and moves what it did into :in-order-to

The main motivation for change #1 is to be able to define new  
operations and source file classes in a system's dependencies and have  
them used in that systems definitions; the main motivation#2 was #1:  
it does no good to delay parsing of the defsystem form if traverse has  
to complete the parse before anything else happens!. As for #3, while  
doing three things at once is just very human (and besides, it made #2  
easier).

I've got several hours of work left cleaning up loose ends and moving  
restarts and with-compilation-units around into better places.

What I'd appreciate is any high-level feedback about the idea of these  
changes and whether or not I've missed some horrible interaction that  
nullifies the whole direction. I hope to post the suggested changes  
later in the week.

(Continue reading)

Richard M Kreuter | 8 Oct 2008 17:12

Re: rfc - delay the parsing of system components

Gary King writes:
> I just finished a rough cut of an ASDF overall that makes three  
> largish changes:
> 
> 1. delays the parsing of system components until needed by traverse.  
> In particular, this means that the :components clause of defsystem  
> form happens after that system's dependencies have been loaded rather  
> than when the ASD file itself is loaded.
>
> 2. rewrites traverse as a set of methods that immediately call perform  
> (rather than building up a list of perform actions that  are then  
> called in operate).

In the plan-before-execute design that ASDF's always had, methods that
implement pieces of the plan construction protocol (OPERATION-DONE-P,
COMPONENT-DEPENDS-ON, et al.) can rely on being executed before any
steps are carried out in the current run.  Since the protocol doesn't
have any solid semantics, extensions' methods can do anything, really;
executing them mid-way through execution can expose them to conditions
that are arbitrarily unlike what such methods have been written to
reason about.

> 3. does away with :do-first and moves what it did into :in-order-to
>
> The main motivation for change #1 is to be able to define new  
> operations and source file classes in a system's dependencies and have  
> them used in that systems definitions; 

The idiomatic solution for this is to load ASDF extensions in an
EVAL-WHEN at the beginning of a .asd file.  But maybe what you're after

(Continue reading)

Gary King | 13 Oct 2008 02:08

Re: rfc - delay the parsing of system components

Hi Richard, et. al.

Thanks for your comments and thoughts.

> In the plan-before-execute design that ASDF's always had, methods that
> implement pieces of the plan construction protocol (OPERATION-DONE-P,
> COMPONENT-DEPENDS-ON, et al.) can rely on being executed before any
> steps are carried out in the current run.

This is true but I have my doubts that it will matter. Methods like  
COMPONENT-DEPENDS-ON shouldn't really have anything to do with the  
environment (either X depends on Y or it doesn't). Methods like  
operation-done-p should depend on a component and its children (not  
its parents) and thus would not be altered by the proposed change.

> The idiomatic solution for this is to load ASDF extensions in an
> EVAL-WHEN at the beginning of a .asd file.  But maybe what you're  
> after
> is representing the fact that system FOO needs ASDF extension BAR,  
> which
> isn't explicit with the EVAL-WHEN solution.  If that's what you  
> need, it
> might suffice to add a slot for this to SYSTEM and to modify
> PARSE-COMPONENT-FORM to hoist out the slot's initarg and do the LOAD- 
> OP
> on those extensions before looping over the components.

It's true that my proposal isn't required to make ASDF jump through  
the hoops I want it to. IMHO, the eval-when solution is ugly and while  
adding another slot is alright, it seems to me that I should be able

(Continue reading)

Christophe Rhodes | 13 Oct 2008 08:33

Re: rfc - delay the parsing of system components

Gary King <gwking <at> metabang.com> writes:

>> I think #2 is an at-least-in-theory incompatible change.  It might not
>> break anything in the wild, but that can't be known in advance.  It
>> might also lead to a better defsystem than ASDF, but I'm not sure that
>> ASDF should be breaking compatibility with itself at this point.
>
> Hmmm, evolve or die <smile>.

No problem with that, but biological taxonomists have learnt that it's
useful to give mutually-incompatible species different names.  Some
day, computer programmers might see the point of that, too.

(In other words: please do make code easier to write, but please also
give the resulting software a different name.)

Cheers,

Christophe

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/

Gary King | 13 Oct 2008 14:51

Re: rfc - delay the parsing of system components

>> Hmmm, evolve or die <smile>.
>
> No problem with that, but biological taxonomists have learnt that it's
> useful to give mutually-incompatible species different names.  Some
> day, computer programmers might see the point of that, too.
>
> (In other words: please do make code easier to write, but please also
> give the resulting software a different name.)

The question reduces to whether or not this is a different species. I  
don't think it is. Richard correctly points out that my proposal might  
cause problems in the "wild" but there is no evidence for this  
(yet...). To my mind, I've kept the same syntax and ASDF does the same  
operations in the same order (at least in as much as ASDF ever did the  
same things in the same order...). The only change is that instead of  
planning everything before executing, ASDF would now execute as it  
went. I don't see this as incompatible. Do you?

thanks,
--
Gary Warren King, metabang.com
Cell: (413) 559 8738
Fax: (206) 338-4052
gwkkwg on Skype * garethsan on AIM

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/

(Continue reading)

Group

gmane.lisp.cclan.general.

Search Archive

Page

1 | 2 | 3

Articles in period: 22

October 2008

Language

Change language

Options

Current view: Threads only / Showing only 20 lines / Not hiding cited text.
Change to All messages, whole messages, or hide cited text.

Post a message
NNTP Newsgroup
Classic Gmane web interface
XML

XML

RSS Feed
List Information

About Gmane

Recent entries

Consolidating Common Lisp Libraries (5 Nov 2012)
XCVB patch for split-sequence (23 Oct 2009)
How to depend on a system optionally? (18 May 2009)
sourceforge website + cliki (8 May 2009)
git repo on cl.net trashed?! (8 May 2009)
git repository for ASDF (30 Apr 2009)
ASDF:OPERATE should bind *PACKAGE* and *READTABLE* (29 Apr 2009)
[gwking@metabang.com: asdf to cl.net; cvs to git] (25 Jan 2009)
asdf to cl.net; cvs to git (25 Jan 2009)
wither ASDF (14 Jan 2009)
aside from the pangs of history, what about moving ASDF to common-lisp (13 Jan 2009)
ASDF on MSWin (12 Jan 2009)
MISSING-DEPENDENCY not providing some retry restart? (10 Jan 2009)
Add CLEAN-OP to ASDF? (29 Dec 2008)
asdf patch: clisp has mop (29 Dec 2008)
How do I replace my broken ':perform' forms? (8 Dec 2008)
[PATCH] COMPONENT-DEPENDS-ON and operation subclasses (7 Nov 2008)
asdf replacement (18 Oct 2008)
a non-contentious patch for ASDF... (15 Oct 2008)
adding system-loaded-p to ASDF (15 Oct 2008)
rfc - delay the parsing of system components (8 Oct 2008)

Archives

1	November 2012
2	October 2009
21	May 2009
7	April 2009
38	January 2009
11	December 2008
1	November 2008
22	October 2008
26	September 2008
1	August 2008
4	July 2008
30	June 2008
16	May 2008
11	April 2008
10	March 2008
34	February 2008
11	January 2008
7	December 2007
11	November 2007
2	October 2007
13	September 2007
11	August 2007
5	July 2007
20	June 2007
14	May 2007
36	April 2007
8	March 2007
14	February 2007
24	January 2007
5	December 2006
2	November 2006
22	October 2006
5	August 2006
14	July 2006
33	June 2006
38	May 2006
16	March 2006
12	February 2006
3	January 2006
71	December 2005
3	November 2005
5	August 2005
2	July 2005
2	May 2005
3	April 2005
3	February 2005
7	November 2004
2	October 2004
6	September 2004
11	August 2004
4	July 2004
2	June 2004
16	May 2004
5	April 2004
1	March 2004
6	February 2004
24	January 2004
7	December 2003
3	November 2003
14	October 2003
2	September 2003
17	August 2003
9	July 2003
11	June 2003
22	May 2003
10	April 2003
13	March 2003
4	February 2003
3	January 2003
7	December 2002
6	November 2002
13	October 2002
11	September 2002
7	August 2002
9	July 2002
34	June 2002
2	May 2002
2	April 2002
1	March 2002

Design

Zawodny | Right Menu | Left Menu

Your Own Design

Paste the URL of your CSS below. Download CSS template