Re: three questions about ASDF

Hi William,

I'm pretty sure that your answer to your second question is correct.  
I'd suggest asking on #lisp or on an SBCL list for the first and I'd  
love to know the answer to the third myself. :)

On Jun 5, 2006, at 8:28 AM, William Harold Newman wrote:

> I have three questions about ASDF.
>
> First, what is a good way to stop ASDF from suppressing the output
> describing full WARNINGs which result when it calls SBCL's
> COMPILE-FILE function?
>     $ cd /tmp
>     $ mkdir ./foo
>     $ cd ./foo
>     $ echo > foo.asd '(defsystem "foo" :components ((:file "foo")))'
>     $ echo > foo.lisp '(let ((xxx 1)) (print (- xxxx 1)))'
>     $ sbcl --sysinit /dev/null --userinit /dev/null
>     This is SBCL 0.9.13.21, an implementation of ANSI Common Lisp.
>   ...
>     * (require 'asdf)
>     ("ASDF")
>     * (asdf:operate 'asdf:load-op 'foo)
>   ...
>     ; caught STYLE-WARNING:
>     ;   The variable XXX is defined but never used.
>   ...
>     WARNING:
>        COMPILE-FILE warned while performing #<COMPILE-OP NIL  
> {AD0B7C1}> on
>        #<CL-SOURCE-FILE "foo" {ABE4729}>.
> I see STYLE-WARNING output, but not full WARNING output: SBCL  
> signals a
> full WARNING that XXXX is undefined, but no corresponding text appears
> on my screen, except the summary "COMPILE-FILE warned ...". I have  
> been
> playing with expressing the dependencies in a 1KLOC project in ASDF,
> and I've made enough coding errors corresponding to full WARNINGs that
> falling back to
>     * (compile-file "foo")
>   ...
>     ; caught WARNING:
>     ;   undefined variable: XXXX
>   ...
> in order to see the printed form of the full WARNING condition has
> become tiresome. Is there a better way?
>
> Second, if I wanted to experiment with the bleeding edge ASDF by using
> it to override whatever happens to be bundled with my SBCL
> installation, what is "the" (or at least "a") preferred way? Something
> like
>   (load (compile-file "/usr/local/src/asdf-bleeding-edge/asdf"))
> in my .sbclrc?
>
> Third, what is the master upstream version of the ASDF documentation?
> I found errours in the version of the documentation frozen in
> sbcl/contrib/asdf/ when I was investigating ASDF's errour reporting,
> and I'd consider submitting patches, but the documentation in
> "cvs co asdf" from SourceForge looks different, and it isn't 100%
> clear to me that even that is the master upstream version of the
> documentation, and I don't want to try to fix something which has
> already been fixed independently.
>
> -- 
> William Harold Newman <[email protected]>
> PGP key fingerprint 85 CE 1C BA 79 8D 51 8C  B9 25 FB EE E0 C3 E5 7C
> Ubi saeva indignatio ulterius cor lacerare nequit. -- Jonathan  
> Swift's epitaph
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cclan-list mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cclan-list


-- 
Gary Warren King
metabang.com
http://www.metabang.com/
(413) 210 7511
gwking on #lisp (occasionally)