For production, I build images, as some of the production instances don't have either NFS or the SBCL build chain.
But for development, I am almost always in slime, being a filer.
Additionally, the production environment does not lend itself to working with a running image.
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 4:51 AM, William Halliburton whalliburton@gmail.com wrote:
The system Ioad facility I have developed, on its first run on a particular system, creates a core file containing all the support libraries needed for the system, and then starts SBCL using that core file, proceeding to ASDF load the system proper. On subsequent starts, the first core creation step is skipped, saving much time, in most cases making the systems start instantly since no compilation needs to occur. Whenever site-lisp is changed, then the cores need to be removed and will automatically be recreated when the system restarts. In the core is stored the head git SHA commit id taken from site-lisp at the time of core creation in order to detect a core to source code discrepancy when the cores are ran.
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 4:45 PM, Ala'a Mohammad amalawi@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I'm continually learning Common-lisp and trying to find the best style that suites me better. I've tried 'an imager' style (cooking a an image with all required libraries loaded when required), and 'a filer' style (loading files or systems each time I fire-up a CL implementation). I'm interested to hear what others use CL. How do they manage day to day work? how do their preferred style mesh into their production pipeline (coding, debugging, deployment and maintenance)? and what makes them prefer one way over another or the mix if applicable?
Regards,
Ala'a Mohammad.
pro mailing list pro@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro
pro mailing list pro@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro