Magically minimal. It looks great!
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 9:36 AM, Faré fahree@gmail.com wrote:
Basically, yes. I would state, though, that I want the ASDF to work like the primary contract of REQUIRE. That is, this clause from CLHS:
require tests for the presence of the module-name in the list held by *modules*. If it is present, require immediately returns.
I think that ASDF's default mode of grokking the filesystem for changes is what I want in a development environment.
Is this what you want? Should I commit that (exporting the symbols) as asdf 2.20.22?
(in-package :asdf) (defun component-loaded-p (c) (and (gethash 'load-op (component-operation-times (find-component c nil))) t)) (defun loaded-systems () (remove-if-not 'component-loaded-p (registered-systems))) (defun require-system (s) (load-system s :force-not (loaded-systems)))
I really appreciate the responses and the new code to play with. That really is exceptional. I'll send some feedback later, hopefully today, but I have a message queue processing system to build and a web site to get up :(
Have fun!
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org You can only find happiness by striving towards something else.