понедельник, 7 октября 2013 г., 6:42:24 UTC+3 пользователь André Miranda
Moreira написал:
>
> Awesome, now everything seems to work fine!
>
> Well, I'm using SBCL version 1.1.1.0.debian. I enter in the REPL the
> following two expressions:
> * (defun test1 ()
> (sb-ext:exit))
>
> * (defun test2 ()
> (sb-ext:quit))
>
> The test1 is alright, but the test2 gives a style-warning about the
> deprecation of sb-ext:quit, as follows:
> ; caught STYLE-WARNING:
> ; SB-EXT:QUIT has been deprecated as of SBCL 1.0.56.55. Use SB-EXT:EXIT
> or
> ; SB-THREAD:ABORT-THREAD instead.
> ;
> ; In future SBCL versions SB-EXT:QUIT will signal a full warning at
> compile-time.
> In the SBCL manual it says that sb-ext:quit is an early deprecation, and
> that in future versions it will be signalled as a compile-time warning.
>
Thanks, I've reproduced and fixed this.
>
> >I think it is not a good way. There must be some stuff which didn't get
> to be reloaded with this code.
> >It is better to get it work like it worked before but I don't use slime
> and can't fix it.
> What do you mean by "get it work like it worked before"? To (exit) on the
> REPL and run script/server again? Wouldn't it reload everything from the
> beginning?
>
Yes, it will reload all from beginning. I mean using slime for updating
code. I think I've misunderstood something, can you work with slime ?
>
>
> Another topic:
> When clicking around on the app the REPL says:
> WARNING:
> Cannot update the widget children of #<CLOSURE (LAMBDA #
> :IN
> MAKE-BLOG-WIDGET)
> {100C4ED47B}> because it is not
> a widget.
> But Robin's "Learning About Weblocks" he says that lambdas (and, by
> consequence, closures) are widgets too, and the only difference is that
> they are not persistent. In the warning above it looks it is being
> forced/"typecasted" into a widget, giving an idea that I'm misusing lambdas
> in the framework context. What is actually happening?
>
I think that was just a bug, I've fixed it. I see that lambdas can not have
children widgets so there were no method for rendering children.
I've implemented it and that was a bug fix. Thanks.
>
>
> 2013/10/6 o_z <[email protected] <javascript:>>
>
>>
>>
>> суббота, 5 октября 2013 г., 0:33:13 UTC+3 пользователь André Miranda
>> Moreira написал:
>>
>>> While grokking your psycho-tests login code, may I give some small
>>> feedback on other stuff:
>>>
>>> The weblocks-app-generation-script is awesome, and just needs some small
>>> fixes to work with no minor nuisances:
>>> -for some reason, when reading the
>>> lib/weblock-utils/assests-**packages.lisp,
>>> it doesn't have the uiop package already loaded and complains not being
>>> able to use the (uiop:getcwd) function. I just added a quickload before it.
>>> Any better suggestions?
>>>
>> I've added uiop as dependency to weblocks-utils
>>
>>> -the two functions in the script have a few repeated code that
>>> could be encapsulated in a small procedure. Am I being boring?
>>>
>> There are some difficulties for encapsulation. After some attempts I've
>> decided not to change this code.
>>
>>> -the (sb-ext:exit) function was deprecated in SBCL, and it
>>> complains every time that the main app file is loaded, where the function
>>> is defined. Just replace it with (sb-ext:quit) on both script's functions.
>>>
>> I have sb-ext:quit there. Where did you find sb-ext:exit ? Also both
>> sb-ext:quit and sb-ext:exit work well for me.
>>
>>> -I'm still having some trouble with the require-quicklisp files.
>>> It looks like it has been badly packaged:
>>> ; file: path/to/app/.quicklisp-**install/require-quicklisp.lisp
>>> ; in: DEFUN REQUIRE-QUICKLISP
>>> ; (AVAILABLE-VERSIONS (DIST "quicklisp"))
>>> ;
>>> ; caught STYLE-WARNING:
>>> ; undefined function: AVAILABLE-VERSIONS
>>> Every time I start the script/server it gives me a full complaint, but
>>> works anyway. How can I fix it?
>>>
>> I've fixed it here
>> https://github.com/html/require-quicklisp/commit/31920f286cc981458ee2d2154104f5ad51687b10
>>
>>
>>> -I was using the linedit REPL on the terminal to interact with the
>>> running app, but today I realized that I could connect to the running swank
>>> server using "M-x slime-connect" on the terminal! (I loved it =] ). So, in
>>> order to reload changed code into the running app, a simple function like:
>>>
>>> (defun reload ()
>>> (mapcar (f_ (load _))
>>> *src-files*)) ;with *src-files* defined before
>>>
>>> Is this a good way of reload all? Does all actually gets reloaded?
>>>
>> I think it is not a good way. There must be some stuff which didn't get
>> to be reloaded with this code.
>> It is better to get it work like it worked before but I don't use slime
>> and can't fix it.
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for all the support!
>>>
>> Thanks for your feedback.
>>
>>> And thanks Robert Taylor for you disposal on testing. I'll surely need
>>> it!
>>>
>>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "weblocks" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to [email protected] <javascript:>.
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]<javascript:>
>> .
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/weblocks.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"weblocks" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/weblocks.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
