On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 7:30 PM, Faré wrote:
> If your index is just a lisp file,
> why do you even need to subclass cl-source-file, to begin with?
> And if you do, why do you need override any method or initform?
> Let the CL source files be compiled the normal way!
Yes,
Dear Robert and Robert,
here is a complement to Robert Goldman's excellent response.
It includes some style hints for the future of ASDF and its extensions.
>: Robert Dodier
> What I finally settled on is this. When the operation is COMPILE-OP,
> the .info file is copied to same location where
On 20 Mar 2018, at 12:31, Robert Dodier wrote:
Hi, I was asking recently about how to handle a .info file and its
index (CL) in ASDF.
What I finally settled on is this. When the operation is COMPILE-OP,
the .info file is copied to same location where the index fasl will go
(because the index
I think what you want might be more easily done through intervening in
Quicklisp, instead of in ASDF. "Newest" as defined by the filesystem
might not correspond to "newest" in the intuitive sense, depending on
how the files get there. In quick lisp, maybe you could make these
different
Hi,
I wonder if it's possible that if multiple .asd's with the same name
are present, I can ensure that the .asd with the most recent
timestamp is used.
The use case I have in mind is that I'm trying to set up a system to
download automatically-generated tarballs which contain a snapshot of
a
Hi, I was asking recently about how to handle a .info file and its
index (CL) in ASDF.
What I finally settled on is this. When the operation is COMPILE-OP,
the .info file is copied to same location where the index fasl will go
(because the index has some code to read the .info and it assumes the