LISPFUN() in external modules ought to be created in
any package, esp. FFI, EXT or SYS, or even new
packages, e.g. GDI.
This reduces the need for .mem and TO_PRELOAD files
which only do (MAKE-PACKAGE "GDI")
Logged In: YES
Joerg, I am marking this as "pending".
this means that you have 2 weeks to decide if
you still think that this patch is worth pursuing,
and, if you decide to pursue it,
you will need to add a comment here
that would explain why you think we need to auto-create
packages when building modules when READ does not auto-create
packages on (READ-FROM-STRING "FOO:BAR").
Logged In: YES
Actually, my recent experiment with dynload-modules
reinforced the impression that auto-creation is TRT.
Improvements might come along with adding an extra symbol to
module__xyz: the package name. This one would be filled by
DEFMODULE. It's my newest idea. It's different from the
patch in that it allows for one package only (& requires
incompatible changes to all module files).
Having this slot might then allow to relock the package
afterwards, possibly -- or to wait until the subsequent Lisp
file does it.
Concerning redefinitions, I think that a warning is
appropriate (instead of silent overide). I'll have to check
the current behaviour of CLISP. I think continuable errors
are problematic in the early initialisation phase of CLISP.
>building modules when READ does not auto-create
>packages on (READ-FROM-STRING "FOO:BAR")
Oops, did I miss something? Normally that would signal an
error in CL. Auto-creation from READ?!?
Additional complexity comes from modern/case-insensitive
packages (PARI is the only example in
modules/*/preload.lisp). That was not present in 2002.
Feature interaction :-(
>>building modules when READ does not auto-create
>>packages on (READ-FROM-STRING "FOO:BAR")
>Oops, did I miss something? Normally that would signal an
>error in CL. Auto-creation from READ?!?
what I am saying is that (READ-FROM-STRING "FOO:BAR")
will signal an error instead of creating a new package,
and interning and exporting a symbol from it.
I see no reason for modules to be any different.
if you insist on not using TO_PRELOAD,
you might want to try the init1 function.
please do not modify DEFMODULE.
add another macro DEFPACKAGE instead.
the macro should translate into code in init1.
of course, init1 is too late, you would have to add init0
which is real real real ugly.
in short, there are two alternatives to preload:
1. auto-unlocking/auto-creation -- totally un-Lispy
2. init0 -- yuky & ugly.
in fact, init1 is yuky already.
it's bootstrap C code that we are forced to carry around in
you might consider making modprep generate the preload file.
I am not sure this actually buys you much though...
please see how I handle redefining srror.d:sys::strerror in module syscalls