Re: in-order-to and/or do-first

On Oct 8, 2008, at 2:22, Richard M Kreuter wrote:
> Gary King writes:
>> Can anyone recall why we have both in-order-to and do-first? Doesn't
>> in-order-to subsume do-first?
>
> This came up a little more than a year ago:
>
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.cclan.general/674


The separation between the two as it is right now is used by what I'll  
call compilation dependencies: Compilation of file A will trigger  
compilation of dependent file B if load-op is performed on the system  
containing them. I tried to pry in-order-to and do-first apart once,  
then just gave up and left things as they were, because I could not  
figure out how to guarantee that compilation of dependent files  
happens before loading in this case.

HTH,
-- 
Andreas Fuchs, (http://|im:asf@|mailto:asf@)boinkor.net, antifuchs


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/