On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 6:27 PM, Tobias C. Rittweiler<t...@freebits.de> wrote: > Robert Goldman writes: > >> Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote: >> >> > There's (ASDF:OOS 'ASDF:TEST-OP <system>), and on very recent revisions >> > even (ASDF:TEST-SYSTEM <system>) as an abbeviation. >> > >> > I don't think this has been properly documented in the manual of ASDF >> > yet. I hence CC'd the asdf-devel mailing list so this will hopefully get >> > promoted with the due it deserves. >> > >> >> 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 <system>) >> >> to return a value indicating whether or not <system> has passed its tests. > > What is the reason that OPERATE can not return the return value of > PERFORM?
None, but the problem is that each library and developer has his/her own idea of what that output value should be. Alexandria uses NIL for success, CL-PPCRE the opposite. It is all a mess. Juanjo -- Instituto de Física Fundamental, CSIC c/ Serrano, 113b, Madrid 28006 (Spain) http://juanjose.garciaripoll.googlepages.com _______________________________________________ asdf-devel mailing list asdf-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel
