- asdf-devel - mailman3.common-lisp.net

I should know this... finding INPUT-FILES
by Robert Goldman 25 Jan '20

25 Jan '20

I'm looking at the documentation for `INPUT-FILES` and `OUTPUT-FILES` and I see this: ``` (defgeneric output-files (operation component) (:documentation "Methods for this function return two values: a list of output files corresponding to this action, and a boolean indicating if they have already been subjected to relevant output translations and should not be further translated. Methods on PERFORM *must* call this function to determine where their outputs are to be located. They may rely on the order of the files to discriminate between outputs. ")) (defgeneric input-files (operation component) (:documentation "A list of input files corresponding to this action. Methods on PERFORM *must* call this function to determine where their inputs are located. They may rely on the order of the files to discriminate between inputs. ")) ``` Missing in the above is an explanation of how to tell `INPUT-FILES` whether to apply output translations or not. Is this left to the author of the relevant `PERFORM` method? Or is there something one should do when writing a `PERFORM` method or an operator definition?

4 8

Re: ASDF dependency graph or complexity score
by Robert Goldman 11 Jan '20

11 Jan '20

What kind of dependency graph are you looking to make? Just the systems, or also the individual system components? And do you want a visible representation of this graph, or just some set of data structures? I assume the former, since you should be able to use the system components themselves to get all the dependency links. If it's the former, the easiest thing might be to use CL-DOT and write the necessary methods to create a graph. You might need to get ASDF to compute the plan for `LOAD-OP` as a way to ensure that all the required system definitions are loaded. With respect to test systems, I have usually found it best to have my systems, say "foo", have "foo/test" related systems, delegate the `test-op` for "foo" to "foo/test" using `in-order-to`, and then only "foo/test" needs to depend on the test library -- "foo" itself doesn't need it. HtH, R On 23 Dec 2019, at 19:08, Jay wrote: > Thanks. > > I will follow up with Rob later. > > Anyway, thanks for help in the past. I will liaise with Rob to figure > out > the best way forward. > > Jay > > Faré > 6:52 PM (14 minutes ago) > to me >> I guess, I will have to step up at some point. I have a tool that's >> built > with CL. I'll start small from the easier tasks and work my way up the > graph one you highlighted above. >> Then, I will be able to tackle the graph thing, as you said it's no >> easy > fit. >> > Makes sense. > >> Are the TODO you mentioned ordered in some priority list or tagged >> with > easier/medium/hard. >> > Unhappily not. Give it a look and/or give a look at the issues on > launchpad, and/or ask Robert, for guidance. Sorry I don't have time to > sort out the issues right now. > >> And the repo is still the version on gitlab right? Does Rob hang over >> at > #lisp irc? >> > Yes the repo is on gitlab, but the issues are still mostly on > launchpad. > > Robert sometimes is on IRC as rpg (or is is rpgoldman? notthatrpg?). > > —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• > http://fare.tunes.org > "Floating point numbers are like sandpiles; every time you move one > you lose a little sand and pick up a little dirt" > — Vic Vissotsky > > > On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 6:52 PM Faré <fahree(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>> I guess, I will have to step up at some point. I have a tool that's >> built with CL. I'll start small from the easier tasks and work my way >> up >> the graph one you highlighted above. >>> Then, I will be able to tackle the graph thing, as you said it's no >>> easy >> fit. >>> >> Makes sense. >> >>> Are the TODO you mentioned ordered in some priority list or tagged >>> with >> easier/medium/hard. >>> >> Unhappily not. Give it a look and/or give a look at the issues on >> launchpad, and/or ask Robert, for guidance. Sorry I don't have time >> to >> sort out the issues right now. >> >>> And the repo is still the version on gitlab right? Does Rob hang >>> over at >> #lisp irc? >>> >> Yes the repo is on gitlab, but the issues are still mostly on >> launchpad. >> >> Robert sometimes is on IRC as rpg (or is is rpgoldman? notthatrpg?). >> >> —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau >> •Reflection&Cybernethics• >> http://fare.tunes.org >> "Floating point numbers are like sandpiles; every time you move one >> you lose a little sand and pick up a little dirt" >> — Vic Vissotsky >> >> >> >>> On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 11:33 AM Faré <fahree(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I could not follow up in the past as I had to relocate between >>>>> cities >> (central to west coast) so that caused a lot of changes in my >> schedule. >> What is the state of the asdf contributors you mentioned last time -- >> the >> developers taking over asdf development albeit gradually. >>>>> >>>> No one has really stepped forward. It's still Robert Goldman >>>> maintaining things, while I have moved away from active maintenance >>>> and am only reviewing patches and giving advice, sometimes making >>>> small edits to documentation. >>>> >>>>> I just started working on my fairly large system again, and >>>>> recently >> had issues when I was trying to disentangle systems to avoid loading >> multiple test systems that clobber global variables. A secondary goal >> is to >> reduce unnecessary dependencies ( btw I use :class >> :package-inferred-system >> in my setup). >>>>> >>>>> Is there some asdf option that I can use to get the graph for a >>>>> given >> loaded system or some score of complexity due to linkages. I have >> been able >> to improve this over the years and the system is a more stable but >> occasionally hangs when it has to load many packages (hundreds of >> files) >> after compiler update (using SBCL primarily) >>>>> >>>> Aha. Well, it used to be that POIU could extract a dependency graph >>>> from an ASDF system, and act on it to build; but this has bitrotten >>>> a >>>> bit with the latest changes in ASDF 3.3, and POIU is not currently >>>> very stable. If you could fix it, that would be great. But beware, >>>> it's no small undertaking: you have to really get into a lot of >>>> internals to do it right, and make non-trivial changes to UIOP, >>>> likely >>>> including subtle changes to ASDF itself. >>>> >>>> —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau >>>> •Reflection&Cybernethics• >> http://fare.tunes.org >>>> Appropriate fear keeps you alive. Excessive fear prevents the very >>>> thing >>>> it's supposed to protect: life. — Attila Lendvai >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> Jay >>

3 3

Catching up...
by Robert Goldman 14 Dec '19

14 Dec '19

I have been traveling a bunch, so I have not been able to keep up with the -- very welcome -- flurry of improvements and fixes. I'll dig myself out over the next week or two and get these vetted and merged. Just wanted everyone to know I'm still functioning (a little).

1 0

How to debug finding files
by Andreas Davour 26 Nov '19

26 Nov '19

Hi I've read the manual on how asdf finds the files to load, i.e. the asd files. But, if you want to follow along when it does that calculation, in case it goes wrong, how do you do that? I seem to remember this being posted to the list ages back, but have no way of searching that history. /andreas -- "economics is a pseudoscience; the astrology of our time" Kim Stanley Robinson

2 3

test-op and dependencies
by Anton Vodonosov 01 Oct '19

01 Oct '19

How test-op is expected to deal with tests in dependency libraries? If my application depends on several libraries, which in turn depend on others, when a user of my application asdf system runs test-op, is it expected to only run tests of the application itself? Of my test-op implementation should explicitly load and call tests of all dependencies? I think it's better to recommend test-op implementations to run only tests of this system itself and ASDF could provide a "recursive test op", which runs tests on the whole dependency tree.

2 1

Re: PATCH: SIGNAL a condition on test failures, for use with ASDF:TEST-SYSTEM
by Robert Goldman 16 Sep '19

16 Sep '19

Vladimir -- maybe compare this suggestion with what is in the fiveam-asdf contrib in the ASDF repo? Also (and we should probably move this to ASDF-DEVEL) it would be good to have *all* of the tests run to completion even if one or more fail by default, and have the option to exit after the first failure. This could be done by having an `ASDF-SINGLE-TEST-FAILURE` and an `ASDF-TEST-FAILURE` and raising the first at each failure, but by default trapping them and bundling them into the `ASDF-TEST-FAILURE` condition. It might make sense to bundle FiveAM's test report *into* the `ASDF-TEST-FAILURE` (or subclass thereof), so that it can be printed at an appropriate time. On 14 Sep 2019, at 20:48, Vladimir Sedach wrote: > Hello! > > I have a proposed patch to FiveAM on GitHub: > https://github.com/sionescu/fiveam/pull/58 > > I recently wrote a script to run FiveAM tests for one of my > libraries on many different implementations on your own machine: > https://gitlab.common-lisp.net/uri-template/uri-template2/blob/master/run-t… > > I do not want to copy-paste that script for all of my libraries. It > would be nice to contribute a generalized version of the script to > Roswell (on which the script is based), and just be able to say "ros > test my-system in all installed implementations" for any system. > > The first step to doing that is to get ASDF:TEST-SYSTEM to report > errors using a common interface. > > Because of the way ASDF is designed, ASDF:TEST-SYSTEM needs to use > conditions to signal test failures. I like this idea. Since you do > not have to handle conditions raised by SIGNAL, the functionality can > be added without impacting existing use or interfaces of FiveAM (the > use of WARNING instead of ERROR as the parent condition of > TEST-SPEC-FAILURE also ensures this, as many people tend to abuse > HANDLER-CASE to indiscriminately catch ERRORs). > > With this patch, all projects that use FiveAM and define ASDF test-op > should be testable from a generic version of the Roswell script > without any changes. > > The basic mechanism for test automation with FiveAM is then very > simple: > > (handler-case (asdf:test-system "system") > (fiveam:test-spec-failure (condition) > (princ condition uiop:*stderr*) > (uiop:quit 1))) > > Other test libraries can have supported added as well: > > (handler-case (asdf:test-system "system") > ((or fiveam:test-spec-failure prove:test-failure) (condition) > (princ condition uiop:*stderr*) > (uiop:quit 1))) > > The goal is to introduce a parent condition in ASDF that FiveAM, etc., > will then inherit from: > > (handler-case (asdf:test-system "system") > (asdf:test-failure (condition) > (princ condition uiop:*stderr*) > (uiop:quit 1))) > > Ultimately, any system using any test library should be testable this > way, ensuring that test automation becomes trivial to build. > > I am going to propose adding the parent condition to ASDF, but in the > meantime (until the ASDF patch makes it to the repository, another > release comes out, release becomes widely available…), I would like > to get this code into FiveAM. > > Vladimir

4 5

trouble with upgrade of asdf and versions
by adam 06 Sep '19

06 Sep '19

In attempting to upgrade ASDF, I have broken its operation. This work-around has not been helpful. https://stackoverflow.com/q/45043190/8770050 Here is the problem, (and Quicklisp seems to be working OK) CL-USER> (ql:quickload :quickproject) ; Evaluation aborted on #<ASDF-2.26:LOAD-SYSTEM-DEFINITION-ERROR #x213E199E>. CL-USER> (asdf:asdf-version) "3.3.2" CL-USER> *features* (:SWANK :ASDF3.3 :ASDF3.2 :ASDF3.1 :ASDF3 :OS-UNIX :QUICKLISP :ASDF2 :ASDF-UNICODE :CM :SAL :METACLASSES :ASDF :READLINE :REGEXP :SYSCALLS :I18N :LOOP :COMPILER :CLOS :MOP :CLISP :ANSI-CL :COMMON-LISP :LISP=CL :INTERPRETER :SOCKETS :GENERIC-STREAMS :LOGICAL-PATHNAMES :SCREEN :FFI :GETTEXT :UNICODE :BASE-CHAR=CHARACTER :PC386 :UNIX) My Lisp and Emacs versions, on Ubuntu 16.04, are $ clisp --version GNU CLISP 2.49 (2010-07-07) (built on allspice.buildd [127.0.1.1]) Emacs version GNU Emacs 24.5.1 (i686-pc-linux-gnu, GTK+ Version 3.18.9) of 2017-09-21 on lgw01-amd64- 050, modified by Debian Any suggestions on repairing or upgrading my ASDF, gratefully received.

5 9

slime meta-dot in ASDF sources
by Mark H. David 19 Jul '19

19 Jul '19

How do ASDF developers using emacs with SLIME deal with doing meta-dot (meta-.) on function names in ASDF sources. Out of the box, mostly when I meta-. just goes to one big top-level form that starts like this (with-upgradability () (define-condition invalid-source-registry (invalid-configuration warning) Thanks for clues, -Mark

2 2

uiop:directory-files doesn't behave on paths without a trailing slash
by Neil Lindquist 26 Jun '19

26 Jun '19

Hello, I recently noticed that uiop's DIRECTORY-FILES does not ensure that the path is always interpreted as a directory. On sbcl (and presumably other implementations), if the path does not have a trailing slash, the files in the parent directory are instead returned. This does not appear to be the indented behavior, given that SUBDIRECTORIES ensures that the path is a directory. A patch for this new behavior and current/proposed results are below. Neil Lindquist ## Patch ## --- a/uiop/filesystem.lisp +++ b/uiop/filesystem.lisp @@ -209,7 +209,7 @@ Subdirectories should NOT be returned. override the default at your own risk. DIRECTORY-FILES tries NOT to resolve symlinks if the implementation permits this, but the behavior in presence of symlinks is not portable. Use IOlib to handle such situations." - (let ((dir (pathname directory))) + (let ((dir (ensure-directory-pathname directory)))) (when (logical-pathname-p dir) ;; Because of the filtering we do below, ;; logical pathnames have restrictions on wild patterns. ## Current behavior ## CL-USER> (uiop:directory-files "doc") (#P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/README.md" #P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/asdf-driver.asd" #P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/backward-driver.lisp" #P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/common-lisp.lisp" #P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/configuration.lisp" #P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/driver.lisp" #P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/filesystem.lisp" #P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/image.lisp" #P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/launch-program.lisp" #P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/lisp-build.lisp" #P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/os.lisp" #P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/package.lisp" #P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/pathname.lisp" #P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/run-program.lisp" #P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/stream.lisp" #P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/uiop.asd" #P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/utility.lisp" #P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/version.lisp") ## Proposed Behavior ## COMMON-LISP-USER> (uiop:directory-files "doc") (#P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/doc/.gitignore" #P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/doc/Makefile" #P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/doc/docstrings.lisp" #P"C:/Users/Neil/Documents/coding/lisp/asdf/uiop/doc/template.texinfo")

4 7

What replaced the files contained in *systems-being-operated*
by Mirko Vukovic 05 Jun '19

05 Jun '19

Hello, I am hitting a bug when loading lisp-unit2 as it (still) depends on the depreciated variable *systems-being-operated* (I did submit a ticket <https://github.com/AccelerationNet/lisp-unit2/issues/10>, but it is as yet not addressed). So I am trying to fix it myself. The *system-being-operated* variable was replaced by the boolean *in-operate* in 7c3f979c <https://gitlab.common-lisp.net/asdf/asdf/commit/7c3f979c0db4ac5f224ca634ce9…> . *systems-being-operated* was a hash with a list of systems or NIL, while *in-operate* is a boolean (T or NIL). Does some other variable contain the information that *systems-being-operated* held? Thank you, Mirko

2 2