Re: [asdf-devel] Enforcing pure *.asd files

On 3/21/10 Mar 21 -11:55 AM, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll wrote:

On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Tobias C. Rittweiler <tcr@freebits.de mailto:tcr@freebits.de> wrote:

There, however, seems to be an inherent dependency-vs-pureness problem
with user extensions as illustrated by cffi-grovel; from [1]:

 ;;; CFFI-Grovel is needed for processing grovel-file components
 (cl:eval-when (:load-toplevel :execute)
   (asdf:operate 'asdf:load-op 'cffi-grovel))

 (asdf:defsystem example-software
   :depends-on (cffi)
   :serial t
   :components
   ((:file "package")
    (cffi-grovel:grovel-file "example-grovelling")
    (:file "example")))

I know Stelian cursed about this in-persona, wishing for a reader which
has a notion of unresolved-symbols.

This can be cured with my suggestions plus some extensions I note below

• Add a field :asdf-support to list dependencies for the system itself.
• Add a feature by which component types are registered with ASDF so

that they can be named using keywords

Are you sure you can't do this already? I'm looking at class-for-type, and it tries to look up the symbol-name of the component class name in the keyword package.

Please check (I've got a big project today; sorry, I can't spare the time to test this).

Cheers, r