Re: ASDF Issue with compiler warnings on ABCL

On 7/22/17 12:04, Mark Evenson wrote:
> On 7/21/17 00:10, Robert Goldman wrote:
>> ASDF wraps its compilation process with WITH-COMPILATION-UNIT.
>>
>> On at least some implementations, this is necessary so that building
>> doesn't emit spurious undefined function (variable, etc.) warnings.
>>
>> However, on ABCL, using WITH-COMPILATION-UNIT has the side effect of
>> causing warnings to be intercepted and handled by HANDLE-WARNING.  Then
>> it seems that *resignal-compiler-warnings* is bound to NIL, and the
>> compiler swallows them, instead of allowing them to flow down the stack
>> to ASDF's handlers.
>>
>> In turn, this causes at least some of our regression tests to fail,
>> because they check for expected warnings.
>>
>> This looks to me like a bug, but perhaps it's a feature ;-)  Would you
>> please explain and let us know how to handle this
> 
> I am not entirely clear about why ABCL seemingly swallows compiler
> warnings by default.  Such behavior may be historical, having something
> to do with getting an ancient version of SLIME working, but that is just
> a guess.
> 
> I am on a road trip at the moment […]

Seemingly back from my summer break, I can confirm that [Faré's patch][
Fix two tests on ABCL] is the best we can do at the moment.

The generalized boolean JVM:*RESIGNAL-COMPILER-WARNINGS* controls
whether the compiler emits diagnostics to the standard reporting stream
as text or signals conditions, with the default being not to signal.

[I have patched][compiler signals] ABCL trunk to both document this
better as well as exporting the symbol.

[Fix two tests on ABCL]:
https://gitlab.common-lisp.net/asdf/asdf/commit/026ceaea53a35bad04a75c13caa3eb0cc4f02251

[compiler signals doc]:
https://gitlab.common-lisp.net/abcl/abcl/commit/56735922d2773d3ab40a5535a09ee91a69f756ee

-- 
"A screaming comes across the sky.  It has happened before, but there
is nothing to compare to it now."