> It was intended like this?
Yes. This way you can also choose to use local-time for date/time
representation, or not load a date/time data structure at all if you
don't need it.
___
postmodern-devel mailing list
postmodern-devel@common-lisp.net
http://
Marijn Haverbeke writes:
>> I don't understand how is simple-date supposed to be loaded now. Just
>> loading postmodern doesn't seem to be sufficient anymore. Should it be
>> loaded explicitly?
>
> Yes. (And it has been like this for a long time.)
It was intended like this?
Because before dfb9da1
> I don't understand how is simple-date supposed to be loaded now. Just
> loading postmodern doesn't seem to be sufficient anymore. Should it be
> loaded explicitly?
Yes. (And it has been like this for a long time.)
___
postmodern-devel mailing list
pos
On 8/12/2011 7:40 AM, Marijn Haverbeke wrote:
I've pushed a patch. Apparently ASDF2's operation-done-p claims that a
package has been loaded, even when it hasn't. This was causing the
glue to be loaded after both systems, rather than after the one that
got loaded last. I've committed a patch that
Marijn Haverbeke writes:
> I've pushed a patch. Apparently ASDF2's operation-done-p claims that a
> package has been loaded, even when it hasn't. This was causing the
> glue to be loaded after both systems, rather than after the one that
> got loaded last. I've committed a patch that makes the ch
I've pushed a patch. Apparently ASDF2's operation-done-p claims that a
package has been loaded, even when it hasn't. This was causing the
glue to be loaded after both systems, rather than after the one that
got loaded last. I've committed a patch that makes the check a bit
more crude, checking dire
