not only this, if the symbol constituency changes, the notion of
'undefined' frequently yields results far from the intended.
not to mention the (perhaps continuable) errors.
yes, one needs an operator with ensure-like semantics, which is
intended to operate on packages which may already
On 2/24/10 Feb 24 -6:02 AM, Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote:
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
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 TEST-SYSTEM do not take additional initargs.
I see that the docstrings
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 TEST-SYSTEM do not take additional initargs.
I
i wondered that. looks like markdown link-w/o-the-reference-id
syntax. (is supported by docudown?)
but then, it's not clear were it finds it's definition. (work-in-
progress?)
which brings up larger questions.
as i was writing docstrings for de.setf.amqp, i wondered, while
markdown is most
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).
RPG:
Follow-up question: why do we need the ASDF-EXTENSIONS nickname? Can
we sacrifice this
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 initargs is somewhat
cumbersome, it's possible. Unfortunately, the sugar forms LOAD-SYSTEM,
Faré fah...@gmail.com 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
On 2/24/10 Feb 24 -9:22 AM, Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote:
Robert Goldman rpgold...@sift.info
writes:
Actually, allow-other-keys would not be necessary if these weren't
normal functions but generic functions. Then methods can add valid
keywords. And there's a programmatic protocol to get at
On 2010-02-24, at 16:19 , Robert Goldman wrote:
On 2/24/10 Feb 24 -9:09 AM, james anderson wrote:
i wondered that. looks like markdown link-w/o-the-reference-id
syntax. (is supported by docudown?)
but then, it's not clear were it finds it's definition. (work-in-
progress?)
which brings
10 matches
Mail list logo
