Re: Naive DEFSYSTEM replacement
"Tim Bradshaw (as tfb at tfeb dot org)" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.lisp.lispworks.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 29 Jul 2025, at 03:13, Adam Weaver (as adam at cleversure dot com dot au) <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ok. I get that. But it's easy to go too far with this, if an > implementation is so fracked-up that it puts :SNOZZBERRY in not- > required PATHNAME slots, is *anything* that goes wrong really ASDF's > problem to hack around? If either - the implementation is nonconforming, but in use, - that implementation is conforming but strange, Then yes, it is ASDF's problem if ASDF wants to be program which is actually useful to people. valid pathname name n. a string, nil, :wild, :unspecific, or some other object defined by the implementation to be a valid pathname name. And > (pathname-name (parse-namestring "foo*.lisp")) #<sb-impl::pattern "foo" :multi-char-wild> > (pathname-name (parse-namestring "QL:LOCAL-PROJECTS;ORG;FOO*.LISP")) #<sb-impl::pattern "FOO" :multi-char-wild> > (pathname-directory (parse-namestring "/tmp/x*/x.lisp")) (:absolute "tmp" #<sb-impl::pattern "x" :multi-char-wild>) I'm not sure if the second one (logical pathname name) is conforming, although I think it may be. --tim _______________________________________________ Lisp Hug - the mailing list for LispWorks users [email protected] http://www.lispworks.com/support/lisp-hug.html