libera/#commonlisp - IRC Chatlog
Search
15:04:21
Josh_2
Shinmera: After saving my content to a temp file with the correct extension, I am using the :media key and tracing error, I get the following: https://plaster.tymoon.eu/view/2488#2488 sorry its a bit vague but this is out of an in use system
15:10:48
Josh_2
Is doing a (ql:quickload :chirp-dexador) enough to swap over to the dexador backend?
15:16:40
Josh_2
just says :expected-type character :context :aref, cant read the rest because my terminal doesn't scroll back that far
15:41:10
Gnuxie
could it be dexador's equivalent to drakma's text-content-types that needs to be set?
16:53:51
hexology
why does quicklisp/qlot use dates instead of the :version specified in the system?
16:54:31
hexology
Xach: i was under the impression that i can only specify a quicklisp release date in the qlot file, as opposed to a version number
16:54:52
Xach
hexology: I don't know about qlot. quicklisp releases are versioned with a date. there is no system involved.
16:55:14
Xach
The date is not processed as a date, really - it's just a convention with convenient ordering properties usually.
16:55:22
hexology
right, but does quicklisp itself have no facility for checking the version numbers?
16:55:52
hexology
pretty much every other package manager i've seen uses the version number, so i assume there's a good technical reason why quicklisp doesn't work like that
16:56:29
Xach
Every project is snapshotted, built, and released together. Projects are not updated individually.
17:01:06
Xach
hexology: i mean if something doesn't build, i tell the author, and they try to fix it, and then everything is built again.
17:02:55
hexology
i see, i didn't realize manual work was being done to validate that they all build together
17:03:19
hexology
by comparison, npm, pypi, etc. would be "rolling release" where the author can publish a new version at any time
17:03:20
Xach
it's pretty automated, but there's a bit of manual work to plug the failure logs into github or other bug report systems.
17:03:42
Xach
there are advantages to rolling releases too - i don't mind if people don't like how quicklisp works, there are different ways to do things.
17:04:00
hexology
it's not that i don't like it, it's that it's very unusual for a programming language package manager
17:04:49
hexology
what if there's a bug and a developer wants to publish a quick fix? do people just have to install from git, or is it case-by-case where you might do a 2nd release?
17:05:58
Xach
hexology: there are a few options for the user. 1. don't update to the new dist 2. override with a local version from git or whatever. I rarely, rarely make a quick new release of everything - I've done it when slime crashed on startup, once, but fewer than 5 times in 10 years.
17:06:59
Xach
i don't know if it has the indelible release policy or not, but i consider that a feature too
17:10:26
hexology
so there's no "technical" reason why one couldn't make something like npm for lisp packages, it was just a design decision
17:12:05
hexology
based on the website, it looks like ultralisp is also versioned in "releases", but maybe those releases are automatic whenever a package is updated
17:22:21
hexology
now that i understand what a "quicklisp distribution" really is, that makes a lot more sense to me
17:27:59
remexre
are there some weird things with giving an ftype to a function before doing a defsetf for it?
17:28:14
remexre
I get: defining setf macro for FOO when (SETF FOO) was previously treated as a function
17:44:27
Bike
remexre: what that (probably) means is that you have a (setf (foo ...) ...) form being macroexpanded before the defsetf is done