Hello Mark, On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Mark Cox <markcox80@gmail.com> wrote:
I think there are two ways to proceed. The first is to stick with the assumption that the list returned by ASDF:OUTPUT-FILES only contains one item, but process that single item according to the current lisp machine. The second is to assume that ASDF:OUTPUT-FILES can return any number of items. The later is the approach my patch took with the introduction of %COMPILE-FILE-TO-PATHNAME. The problem with the later is that it is not specified how one creates the output file from the input source file. I am not sure if Juan reads this list. He may have a better idea on how to achieve this approach.
Thanks for your clear explanation. After reading it, then re-reading your patch, I reached the following conclusions: 1. Your patch is processing the grovel file n times, where n is the number of items ASDF:OUTPUT-FILES returns. That doesn't make sense, since we only need to process the grovel file once to produce a Lisp file. 2. In this case, since GROVEL-FILE inherits from ASDF:CL-SOURCE-FILE, ASDF:OUTPUT-FILES is computing what the result of compiling the intermediate lisp file should be. We pass it to PROCESS-GROVEL-FILE just to figure out where we should be placing the intermediate lisp file. (Perhaps there's a better way to do that, I don't know.) 3. It would be nice if we didn't have to do Lisp compilation/loading ourselves. Instead, maybe we could delegate that task to the methods specialized on ASDF:CL-SOURCE-FILE. What do you think about something along these lines? (defmethod asdf:perform ((op asdf:compile-op) (c grovel-file)) (let* ((fasl-path (first (asdf:output-files op c)))) (lisp-file (process-grovel-file (asdf:component-pathname c) fasl-path))) (setf (slot-value c 'asdf::absolute-pathname) lisp-file) (call-next-method))) It'd be nice if someone with more ASDF-fu could chime in. :-) Cheers, -- Luís Oliveira http://r42.eu/~luis/