On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 07:45, Ala'a Mohammad <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm interested to hear what others use CL. How do > they manage day to day work? how do their preferred style mesh into > their production pipeline (coding, debugging, deployment and > maintenance)? and what makes them prefer one way over another or the > mix if applicable?
For loading required software, I'd say 100% filer. ASDF and Quicklisp make operating on files to easy for me that I just don't want to waste any energy thinking about what definitions are in the image and which I've saved in a (source-controlled) file somewhere - the 30 seconds I spend waiting for software to load are nothing compared to an afternoon spent debugging a function whose definition in the image differs from what is in the file containing its (alleged) source code... Or worse, functions/variables that are present only in the image, and not in any file. When it comes to throw-away code, though, I usually just type it into the repl or the slime-scratch buffer. But: once throwaway stuff starts becoming useful, I use quickproject and paste the latest definitions into a source file and check that into git ASAP. Of course, this step has the potential to go wrong in the same way I mentioned above: if I manage to forget a definition, it's debug time again. Fortunately, that happens early enough in the source's lifetime that it's not hard to find the definition again. As for deploying, I have started making quicklisp trees containing the requisite software and a git checkout of my project. You can still incrementally load stuff, and you can be pretty certain that what you tested truly is what you deployed (-: Hope that's useful, -- Andreas Fuchs, (http://|im:asf@|mailto:asf@)boinkor.net, antifuchs _______________________________________________ pro mailing list [email protected] http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro
