From: Gabriel D. R. <gd...@in...> - 2010-07-29 22:50:40
|
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Sam Steingold <sd...@gn...> wrote: > On 7/29/10, Gabriel Dos Reis <gd...@in...> wrote: >> > >> > what makes you think that non-nil tertiary value of COMPILE-FILE means >> > that COMPILE-FILE failed - apart from the name of the return value? >> > >> > I think that the name is not particularly appropriate. >> >> I'm not interpreting 'failure' as failure to produce an output file. >> I am interpreting it as is in the spec -- detection of an ERROR or >> WARNING condition (other than STYLE-WARNING.)> >> How is that used? >> This is a situation where it can be used by automated builds: if the >> input file contains a use of a variable that was not declared, then >> the compiler would issue a warning for a use of a variable that is >> not declared. Depending on the situation, runtime evaluation is >> likely to produce an error. In that case, the WARNING (and not >> a STYLE-WARNING) is a indication that something might go wrong. >> >> So, an automated build tool would consult failure-p and abort the >> build. > > I do not see how this behavior is justified by the spec. > specifically, I do not see how a WARNING can justify an ABORT. I am not sure I am following you. Are you talking of a Lisp compiler or a build tool based on a Lisp compiler? -- Gaby |