Re: [Sbcl-devel] No broken fasl left behind?

[Juho S. <js...@ik...>]

"Nikodemus Siivola" <nik...@ra...> writes:

> CLHS COMPILE-FILE entry says that the primary value of COMPILE-FILE
> is NIL if "file could not be created". We currently implement this meaning
> "could not create the file in the filesystem", which I submit is suboptimal.
> 
> I propose to interpret the entry to mean "_fasl_ could not be created", and
> return NIL (and clean up the fasl) if the compilation was aborted.
> 
> Is this sane, or taking too many liberties?

At least I've always considered producing non-complete fasls to be a
bug, not a feature, so that sounds good.

-- 
Juho Snellman