Re: operating on multiple systems

C Y wrote:
> Gary King wrote:
>> Does anyone else like the idea of being able to:
>>
>> (asdf:oos 'asdf:load-op '(project-1 project-2))
>>
>> It seems like a pretty easy change and intuitive from the interface/ 
>> API perspective.
> 
> Makes sense to me, and saves on typing :-).  I'll vote for it.
> 

I'm inclined to vote against this.  In general, I'm not a big fan of
functions that have to guess what their arguments mean (hmmmm.... this
is a list, so it must be a bunch of systems, not just one), and where
that means that it's hard to describe simply what a function does (if
it's one system then, else if its.... what it means when this call fails
halfway through, etc.).

I have only a not very well thought out gut feel about what
distinguishes OK overloading from overloading that's more complicated.
Somehow it seems here that the multiple system behavior is more
different than the single system behavior than it should be.  The
failure case is what gets me for this one.  Others may have the opposite
opinion on this issue, which seems an aesthetic one.

Anyway,

(map #'(lambda (x) (oos load-op x)) projects)

doesn't seem that bad to me....

For that matter, I just use the repl commands in ACL and slime-aclrepl
to be able to do

:als project-1

and that seems like a heck of a lot more savings than this does....

Not a huge deal, but this would be pretty low on my priority list
compared to finally getting "just load, don't compile" files into ASDF,
turning traverse into a generic function, etc.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/