Faré wrote:
I get it, but now ASDF does more than one kind of build, including some
things (with the bundle-op) that look a lot more like what 'make' does than what ASDF has done up to now.
Indeed. On the other hand, you just acknowledged that all these things are a kind of "build".
I don't think there IS a single word that captures these two radically different things, so what's the advantage to papering over their differences by using a single word?
I.e., I push a button, and it either loads a system into my running lisp image (possibly without building *anything*), or builds a stand-alone executable. Why would I want a single button, or a single word, to use for both of these operations?
I suppose the counter-argument is that there IS a thing those two operations have in common: each is the default operation for the corresponding system.
That seems reasonable: the system author might want to create and deliver a system that is intended to be a standalone executable, and is never meant to be integrated into a running lisp image.
In that case, maybe instead of trying to take a real English word that already has a meaning, we should take a short phrase that means exactly what we will do:
DO-DEFAULT-OPERATION-ON-SYSTEM to be shortened to DDO
[I don't like DoS or DDoS for obvious reasons! ;-)]
I think DEFAULT-OP is a better name than BUILD-OP because it says what it means.
Best, r