From e94b2dfb37567433a1d15034a67eddbe1ca94002 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Francois-Rene Rideau <tunes@google.com> Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 18:41:13 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] TODO for define-package, as reaction to recently experienced bug. --- TODO | 25 +++++++++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/TODO b/TODO index ed1c7c40..7fc881c8 100644 --- a/TODO +++ b/TODO @@ -326,10 +326,23 @@ It looks like SWANK can be fixed soon, though, so we'll see. * See message from 2014-01-27 05:26:44 GMT for stuff to document. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.asdf.devel/3675/focus=3695 -* deferred-warnings support probably needs to be redone better. - * implement deferred warnings support on lispworks - * turn undefined function style-warnings into full warnings(?) - * work with cl-test-grid to eliminate deferred warnings from quicklisp libraries - * https://www.mail-archive.com/asdf-devel@common-lisp.net/msg03608.html - * czak@google.com rewrote part of deferred warnings support. +* UIOP +** deferred-warnings support probably needs to be redone better. +*** implement deferred warnings support on lispworks +*** turn undefined function style-warnings into full warnings(?) +*** work with cl-test-grid to eliminate deferred warnings from quicklisp libraries +*** https://www.mail-archive.com/asdf-devel@common-lisp.net/msg03608.html +*** czak@google.com rewrote part of deferred warnings support. Ask him for the code he implemented at Google. + +** define-package cannot deal with symbols moving "forward". +*** document that THOU SHALT NOT USE :RECYCLE with packages previously + defined by define-package when building from scratch. +*** Maybe add a check? But how to tell whether you're building from scratch? +*** Add some :moved-to directive to define-package, such that + (:moved-to forward-package symbols...) + will declare symbols as moved forward: when the symbol already exists, + it is moved to the forward package if that package already exists, + after the package created if it doesn't exist yet (!) +*** There again, a check that a forward-package is not backward + would be very nice. -- GitLab