On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Anton Vodonosov avodonosov@yandex.ru wrote:
I don't think that preserving OPERATION semantics is really ruled out. Lets consider it a little bit more?
Is it true that old ASDF:OPERATION is semantically equivalent to the new DOWNWARD-OPERATION? If yes, the proposal I made earlier looks appropriate:
OPERATION inherit from DOWNWARD-OPERATION COMPILE-OP inherit from OPERATION LOAD-OP inherit from OPERATION LOAD-SOURCE-OP inherit from OPERATION
If we make so, these operations are backward compatible and at the same time fit the new ASDF 3 design.
It's not backward compatible with systems that define methods on operation, and expect the method to be always calls for all operations. I admit I haven't kept track of how many of them there were while auditing quicklisp; a few, still, that will have to be updated — making the exercise self-defeating as a way to detect old code.
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org Two possibilities exist: Either we are alone in the Universe or we are not. Both are equally terrifying. — Arthur C. Clarke