From fahree at gmail.com Tue Oct 8 01:32:55 2013 From: fahree at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Far=E9?=) Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 21:32:55 -0400 Subject: [xcvb-devel] XCVB and MOCL Message-ID: Dear Lisp hackers, XCVB has fallen behind since 2012, because I've focused so much energy on making ASDF better instead. However, there is renewed interest in XCVB because of MOCL and its singular cross-compilation concept (and also from a few people at Google who'd like to use it there). Wes may explain better, but IIUC, he currently has a very bastardized ASDF 2.019.2 that is trying to distinguish between cross-compilation environment and target environment. XCVB notably lacks: * support for file encodings, a la asdf-encodings * support for around-compile and compile-check hooks * support for the new one-package-per-file style of asdf-package-system, quick-build or faslpath * support for converting from asdf's new foo/bar names and/or :if-feature feature. * support for asdf's new concatenate-source-op and co. * good fallbacks for things not (fully) converted to using build.xcvb * good extensibility that could rival ASDF's * support for deferred-warnings * support for quicklisp * support for version control at all * a fix to running out of memory while running its full test suite * support for Google's build system Sometimes, I'm wondering whether there could be a way to subvert the ASDF architecture, introduce some notion of host vs target in it through an indirection in perform methods, and get most of the benefits of XCVB through ASDF and its asdf-package-system extension. ??? ? Fran?ois-Ren? ?VB Rideau ?Reflection&Cybernethics? http://fare.tunes.org There are just two rules of governance in a free society: Mind your own business. Keep your hands to yourself. ? P. J. O'Rourke