The tests on 3.1.0.94 have completed.
No regressions detected, here is the report: http://common-lisp.net/project/cl-test-grid/asdf/asdf-diff-37.html
The only failure is teepeedee2, which fails because of its own problem - it includes in its source code libraries like babel, incompatible with babel from quicklisp.
The lisps tested: abcl-1.2.0-fasl42-linux-x86 abcl-1.2.1-fasl42-linux-x86 ccl-1.9-f96-linux-x86 clisp-2.49-unix-x86 cmu-snapshot-2014-01__20e_unicode_-linux-x86 ecl-13.5.1-unknown-linux-i686-bytecode ecl-13.5.1-unknown-linux-i686-lisp-to-c sbcl-1.1.11-linux-x86
I am now preparing to test the patch. Fare, you say on the lates SBCL, therefore I have build sbcl-1.1.16. Will test on it.
Best regards, - Anton
12.03.2014, 05:48, "Faré" fahree@gmail.com:
Dear Anton,
can you (1) run cl-test-grid on all implementations with 3.1.0.94, our release candidate?
can you run the cl-test-grid on at least SBCL with the latest ASDF and the attached patch?
In writing my article "ASDF3, or Why Lisp is Now an Acceptable Scripting Language", one of the limitations I list is the mess of uncontrollable syntax.
This would fix it... but might break dirty files that side-effect the current syntax without first creating and using a new readtable. Breaking these files is actually desired, but we need to check how large is the issue before we do it (if we do).
I figure that, like any other potentially disruptive change, it is best done just before a release that defines a new features, in this case, #+asdf3.1
Of course, I won't commit any such thing to master without maintainer approval.
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny. — Ernst Haeckel