Do you plan to change the name of monolithic-fasl-op ?
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Faré fahree@gmail.com wrote:
Speaking of asdf-bundle and ECL...
In ASDF 3.1, I renamed the misnomer binary-op to deliver-asd-op; is there any user in the ECL world who cares about that old name from asdf-ecl? I could add a backward-compatible shim.
While I'm at renaming misnomers, I'd like to rename fasl-op to compile-bundle-op and load-fasl-op to load-bundle-op. I expect these classes to be used, though, and do intend to have backward-compatible classes available — even though nothing shows in either the ECL sources or Quicklisp.
[I need to confirm these renamings with the current ASDF maintainer, though].
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org Yield to temptation; it may never pass your way again. — Robert Heinlein, "Time Enough For Love"
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 12:14 AM, Faré fahree@gmail.com wrote:
Regarding ASDF and ECL, it seemed to me that *load-system-operation* had been designed so I could/should do this in asdf/bundle: (unless (use-ecl-byte-compiler-p) (setf *load-system-operation* 'load-fasl-op))
Unhappily, when I did, I got 4 errors while testing. I found 1 bug in ASDF, 2 bugs in test scripts that didn't expect load-fasl-op (good for ECL to find them! all of them fixed), and what looks like one bug in ECL.
If you uncomment the lines mentioned above in bundle.lisp, modify this test so it uses load-fasl-op instead of load-op, have it (trace c::builder load* perform-plan perform) if you want, and
run it:
make t l=ecl t='test-xach-update-bug.script'
The .fasb is loaded, but fails to define the second-version package. If you load it into another fresh image, it works.
Therefore, after adding two lines, I commented them out again.
Or is it per design that if you load a fasb, then another incompatible version of a same-named, same location, fasb in the very same image, the results are undefined? But it looks like it's working for a regular fas, since the test works using load-op.
In any case, if some ECL maintainer has spare cycles, this deserves to be investigated eventually.
I'm running ECL 13.5.1 (git:e7daee08e8cb7d4b4cea4bc27ce9c7839e236938) on Linux amd64. It's the last version that doesn't bug out with program-op because of the bug
If you tell me I should use load-fasl-op anyway, I will.
PS: Anton, if you have time, can you re-run tests after uncommenting the mentioned lines in bundle.lisp? I'm interested in whether there are regressions using ECL this way... it did error out on missing dependencies in a few of ASDF's tests (including in asdf-encodings). Otherwise, I think we have a release candidate with 3.1.0.92.
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics•
There are two kinds of pacifists: those who try to disarm the criminals,
and
those who try to disarm the victims.