On 7 June 2010 00:33, Stelian Ionescu sionescu@cddr.org wrote:
Signed-off-by: Stelian Ionescu sionescu@cddr.org
asdf.lisp | 4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/asdf.lisp b/asdf.lisp index 859d93c..0b4ba6c 100644 --- a/asdf.lisp +++ b/asdf.lisp @@ -2508,8 +2508,8 @@ located." (incf inherit) (funcall directive-validator directive)) :finally
- (unless (= inherit 1)
- (error "One and only one of ~S or ~S is required"
- (unless (<= inherit 1)
- (error "At most one of ~S or ~S is allowed"
:inherit-configuration :ignore-inherited-configuration))) form)
It was initially on purpose that I inserted this restriction, because I felt that 1- there was no clearly good default that I could see. 2- if such a default is identified, we can enable it later. 3- if no default is initially provided, we can provide one later with backwards compatibility; but if we provide one, we can't change it with backwards compatibility. 4- I'd rather error out early with an annoying error message than do something silently that will be the wrong thing for many users.
Do you really think there should be a default? Which, and for what reason? Is there a compelling reason to think that everyone will agree to same default?
[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | Reflection&Cybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. — Friedrich von Schiller