Hi Daniel,
I like your sketch but wonder about adding a second interface without
removing the first. Since we shouldn't remove the first for both
backwards compat and special variable goodness, I learn towards
keeping things the same and running the checks late.
On Jul 10, 2009, at 11:37 PM
2009/7/10 Stelian Ionescu :
> On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 12:31 +0200, Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote:
>> I think it's bitten pretty much all of us that we at least once tried to
>> push a non-directory-designating filename to *CENTRAL-REGISTRY*.
>>
>> It's a common pitfalls for newcomers.
>>
>> Couldn't ASD
Stelian Ionescu wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 12:31 +0200, Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote:
>> I think it's bitten pretty much all of us that we at least once tried to
>> push a non-directory-designating filename to *CENTRAL-REGISTRY*.
>>
>> It's a common pitfalls for newcomers.
>>
>> Couldn't ASDF sig
2009/7/10 Stelian Ionescu :
> On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 12:31 +0200, Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote:
>> I think it's bitten pretty much all of us that we at least once tried to
>> push a non-directory-designating filename to *CENTRAL-REGISTRY*.
>>
>> It's a common pitfalls for newcomers.
>>
>> Couldn't ASD
On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 12:31 +0200, Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote:
> I think it's bitten pretty much all of us that we at least once tried to
> push a non-directory-designating filename to *CENTRAL-REGISTRY*.
>
> It's a common pitfalls for newcomers.
>
> Couldn't ASDF signal a warning when it encount
> I believe that FILE-NAMESTRING is supposed to do roughly what you want
> here.
>
excellent!
>> (defun ensure-directory-pathname (pathname)
>> (if (directory-pathname-p pathname)
>> pathname
>> (make-pathname
>>:directory `(,@(pathname-directory pathname)
>>
Gary King writes:
>
> (defun pathname-name+type (pathname)
>"Returns a new pathname consisting of only the name and type from
> a non-wild pathname."
>(make-pathname :name (pathname-name pathname)
> :type (pathname-type pathname)))
I believe that FILE-NAMESTRING is suppo
New (more complicate) code:
(defun directory-pathname-p (pathname)
(and (member (pathname-name pathname) (list nil :unspecific))
(member (pathname-type pathname) (list nil :unspecific
(defun pathname-name+type (pathname)
"Returns a new pathname consisting of only the name and ty
>>
>> Couldn't ASDF signal a warning when it encounters such a thing while
>> grovelling through the registry?
>
> Wouldn't it be more user-friendly to coerce such pathnames to ones
> that
> denote directory names?
It sounds like there are two questions:
* How to inform the user that something
Richard M Kreuter writes:
> Wouldn't it be more user-friendly to coerce such pathnames to ones that
> denote directory names?
Small addendum to my previous mail:
Even in the case of automatic coercing, I think ASDF should signal a
style-warning for educational purposes.
-T.
Richard M Kreuter writes:
> "Tobias C. Rittweiler" writes:
>
> > I think it's bitten pretty much all of us that we at least once tried to
> > push a non-directory-designating filename to *CENTRAL-REGISTRY*.
> >
> > It's a common pitfalls for newcomers.
> >
> > Couldn't ASDF signal a warning whe
"Tobias C. Rittweiler" writes:
>
> I think it's bitten pretty much all of us that we at least once tried to
> push a non-directory-designating filename to *CENTRAL-REGISTRY*.
>
> It's a common pitfalls for newcomers.
>
> Couldn't ASDF signal a warning when it encounters such a thing while
> grov
Gary King wrote:
> How about this:
>
>> (defun directory-pathname-p (pathname)
>> (and (member (pathname-name pathname) (list nil :unspecified))
>>(member (pathname-type pathname) (list nil :unspecified
>>
>> (defun sysdef-central-registry-search (system)
>> (let ((name (coerce-nam
How about this:
>
> (defun directory-pathname-p (pathname)
> (and (member (pathname-name pathname) (list nil :unspecified))
>(member (pathname-type pathname) (list nil :unspecified
>
> (defun sysdef-central-registry-search (system)
> (let ((name (coerce-name system))
> (to-re
Hi Tobias,
I think this would be a good thing.
On Jul 7, 2009, at 6:31 AM, Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote:
>
> I think it's bitten pretty much all of us that we at least once
> tried to
> push a non-directory-designating filename to *CENTRAL-REGISTRY*.
>
> It's a common pitfalls for newcomers.
>
>
I think it's bitten pretty much all of us that we at least once tried to
push a non-directory-designating filename to *CENTRAL-REGISTRY*.
It's a common pitfalls for newcomers.
Couldn't ASDF signal a warning when it encounters such a thing while
grovelling through the registry?
-T.
_
16 matches
Mail list logo
