On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Robert P. Goldman rpgoldman@sift.info wrote:
If you have any systems that define their own subclasses of OPERATION, *please* pull this update and test.
This new version checks to see if OPERATION classes have been updated to adapt to Fare's refactoring of the OPERATION class hierarchy.
In a nutshell, Fare has added MIXIN subclasses of OPERATION that control the propagation of dependencies. These new subclasses are
DOWNWARD-OPERATION UPWARD-OPERATION SIDEWAY-OPERATION and SELFWARD-OPERATION
To these, I have added NON-PROPAGATING-OPERATION.
New subclasses of OPERATION will be checked to see if they inherit from one of the above classes, and if they do not, ASDF will signal an error.
Fixes for this error should look something like this:
(defclass my-operation (OPERATION) ...)
should turn into something like
(defclass my-operation (#-asdf3 OPERATION #+asdf3 DOWNWARD-OPERATION) ...)
with DOWNWARD-OPERATION being replaced by whatever is/are the appropriate dependency (non-)propagating class(es).
I hope to add a page or two to the Texinfo documentation to provide more information before the final release.
I'm worried about this patch. Can you get it tested with cl-test-grid before release? I fear there are many currently working systems that will break due to this change.
Anton, can you help?
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org As of vices, the State will let you devote your life to a false religion, encourage you to have too many kids, but ban use of psychedelics.