Rather than cluttering up the newer version what do you think of having slime include the older version and have the swank loader conditionally load old or new depending on the ABCL version?
There is also slime maintenance cost associated with having it be backward compatible.
An alternative is to check in a compatible version of slime as part of each ABCL release. This requires a bit of thought about managing the case where someone wants to run multiple different lisp implementations in the same emacs, thought I'm.not sure how prevalent this is.
Alan
On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 10:53 AM Alan Ruttenberg alanruttenberg@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 7:19 AM, Mark Evenson evenson@panix.com wrote:
On 1/3/17 20:46, Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 6:57 AM, Mark Evenson evenson@panix.com wrote:
On 1/3/17 00:35, Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
Well, I've gone and made an attempt at a "less leaky" version. (It
became
an obsession :( )
Very cool. I need to find some cycles to start working through your
code.
One question: do you expect version of SLIME categorically fail
completely with previous ABCL versions (i.e. those without
ABCL-INTROSPECT)? Or were your able to special-case the new features in
swank-abcl.lisp?
[…]
But is it worth it, given that it will require the new version of ABCL
for
source-location?
I will incur significant "support" cost if SLIME stops working for
existing users, so I need to avoid that scenario if at all possible.
I'll look into it.