Hi all,
Will wild-module support ever be fully and "officially" supported?
Currently there's what appears to be a sample implementation as part of asdf/contrib but, if I recall correctly, asdf/contrib is bound to disappear eventually (actually, the documentation says this is an empty package). However, it's not clear how to use it, it's not documented and it's not clear if it will ever be a part of asdf or not.
In my mind, this is an useful feature. Not for small systems (which, sadly, are the majority of Common Lisp open source projects), but for large systems where new files may be added to a directory to incorporate additional functionalities (a plug-in kind of thing).
In these scenarios, wild-module definitions would ease development and system maintenance greatly. As far as I know, asdf is perfectly capable of implementing it and it looks to me like an implementation-agnostic feature, so I see no reason not to include as a core component.
Thanks, rcn
On 6/24/16 Jun 24 -12:31 PM, rcn wrote:
Hi all,
Will wild-module support ever be fully and "officially" supported?
Currently there's what appears to be a sample implementation as part of asdf/contrib but, if I recall correctly, asdf/contrib is bound to disappear eventually (actually, the documentation says this is an empty package). However, it's not clear how to use it, it's not documented and it's not clear if it will ever be a part of asdf or not.
In my mind, this is an useful feature. Not for small systems (which, sadly, are the majority of Common Lisp open source projects), but for large systems where new files may be added to a directory to incorporate additional functionalities (a plug-in kind of thing).
In these scenarios, wild-module definitions would ease development and system maintenance greatly. As far as I know, asdf is perfectly capable of implementing it and it looks to me like an implementation-agnostic feature, so I see no reason not to include as a core component.
AFAICT, wild-modules are completely undocumented and, since I wasn't involved in their development, I don't understand what they are for, or what they are supposed to do. There are neither docstrings nor comments.
I also note that the code in contrib is more than 3 years old, so likely doesn't even work.
So I am not in a position to answer your question (except by saying "WTF is a wild module?").
In order to move towards integration, I would like to see some kind of specification to describe the intended function of WILD-MODULE, and how we intend to meet the specification.
Then we could move forward with getting the code integrated, and some appropriate documentation into the manual. A test suite would also be required before we could "ship" WILD-MODULEs.
Best, r
wild-modules were an example extension and/or contrib from the asdf 1 days. There is a test for them in test/ but otherwise I don't believe anyone uses them. If you have the asdf git installed, you can use them with package-inferred-system.
I believe that package-inferred-system is a better way to achieve a similar effect, that allows for dependencies between sub-systems, unlike wild-modules. I suppose a wildcard option to load all files in a directory while using package-inferred-system dependencies would be a nice feature to add. But so far, I found it more practical to have an explicit file named "all.lisp" that includes all the files that matter.
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org Quality means doing it right when no one is looking. — Henry Ford Morality means doing the right thing when no one is looking. — Jan Krepelka
On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Robert Goldman rpgoldman@sift.net wrote:
On 6/24/16 Jun 24 -12:31 PM, rcn wrote:
Hi all,
Will wild-module support ever be fully and "officially" supported?
Currently there's what appears to be a sample implementation as part of asdf/contrib but, if I recall correctly, asdf/contrib is bound to disappear eventually (actually, the documentation says this is an empty package). However, it's not clear how to use it, it's not documented and it's not clear if it will ever be a part of asdf or not.
In my mind, this is an useful feature. Not for small systems (which, sadly, are the majority of Common Lisp open source projects), but for large systems where new files may be added to a directory to incorporate additional functionalities (a plug-in kind of thing).
In these scenarios, wild-module definitions would ease development and system maintenance greatly. As far as I know, asdf is perfectly capable of implementing it and it looks to me like an implementation-agnostic feature, so I see no reason not to include as a core component.
AFAICT, wild-modules are completely undocumented and, since I wasn't involved in their development, I don't understand what they are for, or what they are supposed to do. There are neither docstrings nor comments.
I also note that the code in contrib is more than 3 years old, so likely doesn't even work.
So I am not in a position to answer your question (except by saying "WTF is a wild module?").
In order to move towards integration, I would like to see some kind of specification to describe the intended function of WILD-MODULE, and how we intend to meet the specification.
Then we could move forward with getting the code integrated, and some appropriate documentation into the manual. A test suite would also be required before we could "ship" WILD-MODULEs.
Best, r
-
Faré -
rcn -
Robert Goldman