[112776] trunk/dports/lang/clisp/Portfile

[Ryan Schmidt]

On Nov 11, 2013, at 10:14, Daniel J. Luke wrote:

>>> platform variants get recorded in the registry.
>> 
>> Is that still true?
> 
> yes (at least, I have one example of a port with a platform darwin that port installed has listed with +darwin and port variants doesn't list a +darwin variant).

I’m not seeing it on my system, for example with wine-devel. What port do you see this with? What exactly does “port -v installed” show for that port? Maybe there’s something special/wrong about that port.


>>> Using bare if statements also looses the (mostly) declarative nature of the portfile. Encouraging people to write portfiles this way also weakens the generally true heuristic that if you're doing this sort of thing you're doing it wrong (since you're probably writing your own version of some existing macports functionality).
>> 
>> Meh.
> 
> really? For someone who is quick to jump on /many/ stylistic differences it's surprising that you don't care at all about the initial design philosophy ...

Oh, you’re right, it would be nice to be able to specify platform versions in the block. But it’s a matter of a few more characters on a single line which isn’t a big deal to me. I’d much rather for example find ways of reducing the enormous boilerplate that is the fortran variant recipe.