Received: (at 56297) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Jun 2022 10:25:10 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jun 29 06:25:09 2022 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57675 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1o6Usf-0007ke-MG for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 06:25:09 -0400 Received: from mailrelay.tugraz.at ([129.27.2.202]:12994) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <liliana.prikler@HIDDEN>) id 1o6Use-0007jY-8X for 56297 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 06:25:09 -0400 Received: from lprikler-laptop.ist.intra (gw.ist.tugraz.at [129.27.202.101]) by mailrelay.tugraz.at (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4LXyJc5N5fz1LLyW; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 12:25:04 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mailrelay.tugraz.at 4LXyJc5N5fz1LLyW DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tugraz.at; s=mailrelay; t=1656498304; bh=Apa+7kS0QVQnJlf69JZW9iQrYoQbbumrmOjUGwrgxLM=; h=Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=mrnH3FhrOzn/UhgI4O6C+k9EGw9He9WUfq4w1p1+CSASgwyCvv+WBN43sICweezbz R/uPj35YtXOI3Y2i7R6z+BReMxrErecGLKiyU/LmYbIUWh0KLeJlJgTgqO0HsAeJAg FYwdeF4xYbq7MAMSMtXQpOyJjaSwlwzchQRFxiNk= Message-ID: <2a8343542ee2301f3effe1cdb04a121c180c119f.camel@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: Guix style imperfections From: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler@HIDDEN> To: Maxime Devos <maximedevos@HIDDEN>, 56297 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 12:25:04 +0200 In-Reply-To: <473413ef0e01f1dcc7d62602a5b660230b216282.camel@HIDDEN> References: <9499300db3fe4222f7126240fb2acad3cdf4371b.camel@HIDDEN> <1d570330e9811ec9327ec4f99e2baed4fd922194.camel@HIDDEN> <473413ef0e01f1dcc7d62602a5b660230b216282.camel@HIDDEN> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.42.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TUG-Backscatter-control: waObeELIUl4ypBWmcn/8wQ X-Spam-Scanner: SpamAssassin 3.003001 X-Spam-Score-relay: -1.9 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.74 on 129.27.10.117 X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 56297 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Am Mittwoch, dem 29.06.2022 um 12:19 +0200 schrieb Maxime Devos: > Liliana Marie Prikler schreef op wo 29-06-2022 om 12:15 [+0200]: > > > > (delete-file > > > > "test- > > > > suite/tests/version.test") > > > > #t)))))) > > > > > > (Would be nice if "guix style" could be taught to remove those > > > #t, > > > but > > > that seems more a feature limitation than a bug to me.) > > It can still do better by not contracting them imho. > > TBC, do you mean doing #t -> #true, #f -> #false? I mean leaving them on an extra line. The current style tool mostly errs when contracting multiple lines, which imho should not be its task. The problem that is solved here, is that people sometimes (particularly in the uri field of the source) make these contractions for style reasons. Guix style, having been taught that, tries to extrapolate this to all fields. Cheers
bug-guix@HIDDEN:bug#56297; Package guix.
Full text available.Received: (at 56297) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Jun 2022 10:20:21 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jun 29 06:20:21 2022 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57593 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1o6Uo1-0007Ws-IZ for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 06:20:21 -0400 Received: from mailrelay.tugraz.at ([129.27.2.202]:57579) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <liliana.prikler@HIDDEN>) id 1o6Unz-0007Wk-GT for 56297 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 06:20:19 -0400 Received: from lprikler-laptop.ist.intra (gw.ist.tugraz.at [129.27.202.101]) by mailrelay.tugraz.at (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4LXyC42kh1z1LLyW; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 12:20:16 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mailrelay.tugraz.at 4LXyC42kh1z1LLyW DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tugraz.at; s=mailrelay; t=1656498016; bh=iBiWfkhrXV9uZLiKyDTuNeFq9lw79T/gaxInc011lco=; h=Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=ZpSlUYAAgMNzjySleY4W4I2pdmLXwFlSzd4CpHjjYWVrOABBxxRu8DSHHRjW7Q2qB U7yvZNzHHJHvGrgV1d64w8R+L/YwZqIq2VkJVq3spVTky2DPFKp8jZ5g47/+ahbXnJ tRSHYIhY4wehbsGqXgPydGI4fkPpB/4HWXdmJKBU= Message-ID: <4de77339747298c76370c2a78ee7e0944a39078b.camel@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: Guix style imperfections From: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler@HIDDEN> To: Maxime Devos <maximedevos@HIDDEN>, 56297 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 12:20:15 +0200 In-Reply-To: <754b54482ba7e443c587230b33ac56416f2b1eb9.camel@HIDDEN> References: <9499300db3fe4222f7126240fb2acad3cdf4371b.camel@HIDDEN> <1d570330e9811ec9327ec4f99e2baed4fd922194.camel@HIDDEN> <754b54482ba7e443c587230b33ac56416f2b1eb9.camel@HIDDEN> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.42.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TUG-Backscatter-control: waObeELIUl4ypBWmcn/8wQ X-Spam-Scanner: SpamAssassin 3.003001 X-Spam-Score-relay: -1.9 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.74 on 129.27.10.117 X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 56297 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Am Mittwoch, dem 29.06.2022 um 12:18 +0200 schrieb Maxime Devos: > Liliana Marie Prikler schreef op wo 29-06-2022 om 12:15 [+0200]: > > Here, it depends. I think I'd write this as > > > > (native-inputs > > (modify-inputs (package-native-inputs guile-3.0) > > (prepend autoconf automake libtool > > flex gperf > > gnu-gettext texinfo))) > > FWIW, I was thinking of > > (native-inputs > (modify-inputs [...] > (prepend autoconf > automake > libtool > flex gperf > gnu-gettext > texinfo))) > > , I haven't really thought about putting multiple inputs on a single > line myself. That ought to be the strict suggestion; the variant I posted above should simply be seen as "acceptable" in lax mode for not breaking the horizontal space limit.
bug-guix@HIDDEN:bug#56297; Package guix.
Full text available.Received: (at 56297) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Jun 2022 10:19:13 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jun 29 06:19:13 2022 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57589 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1o6Umv-0007Up-9b for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 06:19:13 -0400 Received: from baptiste.telenet-ops.be ([195.130.132.51]:58702) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <maximedevos@HIDDEN>) id 1o6Umt-0007Re-RI for 56297 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 06:19:12 -0400 Received: from ptr-bvsjgyhxw7psv60dyze.18120a2.ip6.access.telenet.be ([IPv6:2a02:1811:8c09:9d00:3c5f:2eff:feb0:ba5a]) by baptiste.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id oyKB2700C4UW6Th01yKB2z; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 12:19:11 +0200 Message-ID: <473413ef0e01f1dcc7d62602a5b660230b216282.camel@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: Guix style imperfections From: Maxime Devos <maximedevos@HIDDEN> To: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler@HIDDEN>, 56297 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 12:19:11 +0200 In-Reply-To: <1d570330e9811ec9327ec4f99e2baed4fd922194.camel@HIDDEN> References: <9499300db3fe4222f7126240fb2acad3cdf4371b.camel@HIDDEN> <1d570330e9811ec9327ec4f99e2baed4fd922194.camel@HIDDEN> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-FvP8eZ5bQslQe7MPOs6G" User-Agent: Evolution 3.38.3-1 MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telenet.be; s=r22; t=1656497951; bh=0upPPBp7u/wGYUCjDLDSpLzzAXm0ozZp1SRhdvI2efE=; h=Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=lQxnHL+5+O7JUGsXiZ5UewBPTOAqiAx6FFd9170s3Kb+Si2kVSPh/iVtzFH2w8g5t fqopQZYtw/g5a6lOd/QFM40MvSeMiiDyxJ9oRFVAzHtFIofd0PeVxvOo51pFfomIku ftBLhp70o0yvtPFyV/SAWNZvXINn4N99W2TQH0HhGgjHN2waPWFSWFB1M9sy57Ljl4 DVsMVkD3+QHxG35n8EeDjL6n6/WXBXkwzbUdhB02hM19YcZvapxx1q7mNSXpYB24OX Eao/dLBFrBhAtB6sTXHlXjsrPdACVh3KRff3T0gPilVTxZbIVzFRxZ6mros9fq1Iu8 ntkF85XMpSyTA== X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 56297 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) --=-FvP8eZ5bQslQe7MPOs6G Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 TGlsaWFuYSBNYXJpZSBQcmlrbGVyIHNjaHJlZWYgb3Agd28gMjktMDYtMjAyMiBvbSAxMjoxNSBb KzAyMDBdOgo+ID4gPiDCoMKgwqDCoMKgwqDCoMKgwqDCoMKgwqDCoMKgwqDCoMKgwqDCoMKgwqDC oMKgwqDCoMKgwqDCoMKgwqDCoMKgwqDCoMKgIChkZWxldGUtZmlsZQo+ID4gPiDCoMKgwqDCoMKg wqDCoMKgwqDCoMKgwqDCoMKgwqDCoMKgwqDCoMKgwqDCoMKgwqDCoMKgwqDCoMKgwqDCoMKgwqDC oMKgwqAgInRlc3QtCj4gPiA+IHN1aXRlL3Rlc3RzL3ZlcnNpb24udGVzdCIpCj4gPiA+ICN0KSkp KSkpCj4gPiAKPiA+IChXb3VsZCBiZSBuaWNlIGlmICJndWl4IHN0eWxlIiBjb3VsZCBiZSB0YXVn aHQgdG8gcmVtb3ZlIHRob3NlICN0LAo+ID4gYnV0Cj4gPiB0aGF0IHNlZW1zIG1vcmUgYSBmZWF0 dXJlIGxpbWl0YXRpb24gdGhhbiBhIGJ1ZyB0byBtZS4pCj4gSXQgY2FuIHN0aWxsIGRvIGJldHRl ciBieSBub3QgY29udHJhY3RpbmcgdGhlbSBpbWhvLgoKVEJDLCBkbyB5b3UgbWVhbiBkb2luZyAj dCAtPiAjdHJ1ZSwgI2YgLT4gI2ZhbHNlPwoKR3JlZXRpbmdzLApNYXhpbWUuCg== --=-FvP8eZ5bQslQe7MPOs6G Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iI0EABYKADUWIQTB8z7iDFKP233XAR9J4+4iGRcl7gUCYrwnHxccbWF4aW1lZGV2 b3NAdGVsZW5ldC5iZQAKCRBJ4+4iGRcl7ht6AQD9TBZLgIz00TM9lBpxzw/Q5Q7o Qj/27rcKfohwC2UMjQEA3HE8webHnUqijggjnp1mJv1wh1gvhhOk6Bqu0w1mIQw= =U76J -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-FvP8eZ5bQslQe7MPOs6G--
bug-guix@HIDDEN:bug#56297; Package guix.
Full text available.
Received: (at 56297) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Jun 2022 10:18:17 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jun 29 06:18:17 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57576 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1o6Um1-0007Rp-8x
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 06:18:17 -0400
Received: from baptiste.telenet-ops.be ([195.130.132.51]:58702)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <maximedevos@HIDDEN>) id 1o6Uly-0007Re-JX
for 56297 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 06:18:15 -0400
Received: from ptr-bvsjgyhxw7psv60dyze.18120a2.ip6.access.telenet.be
([IPv6:2a02:1811:8c09:9d00:3c5f:2eff:feb0:ba5a])
by baptiste.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp
id oyJC2700A4UW6Th01yJCu8; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 12:18:12 +0200
Message-ID: <754b54482ba7e443c587230b33ac56416f2b1eb9.camel@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: Guix style imperfections
From: Maxime Devos <maximedevos@HIDDEN>
To: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler@HIDDEN>,
56297 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 12:18:07 +0200
In-Reply-To: <1d570330e9811ec9327ec4f99e2baed4fd922194.camel@HIDDEN>
References: <9499300db3fe4222f7126240fb2acad3cdf4371b.camel@HIDDEN>
<1d570330e9811ec9327ec4f99e2baed4fd922194.camel@HIDDEN>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512";
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-d061YPtVLST8y7WiMTQZ"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.38.3-1
MIME-Version: 1.0
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telenet.be; s=r22;
t=1656497892; bh=uh5DDwWmBiTnrvbYYtGcQFalqwEA26EoDYlP5HH6sB4=;
h=Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References;
b=nyfnymibeWFH5gBwAPiSQZUhIUNc5ey5J/qo/kyllVg7sqhGvJpIYIMD7ggUGZuaL
DLvITrDn30T4YZzQvgww/mBclRoxg/5MGt97UQhRWKu4wcFDXpWCBYo+fArsBXqald
0z8mIl21tBNQoj66RkzRnqXqZl1VhYk1GdulQv4vSocwBMV2iV2Q2QZYxuWdAPWggT
sDqECPrXy14yjz7fJ7OJF9MBI9gD4+Lr7c3N1mY621PoUoqoFlx44d5mctRwvpUHV7
kzlwVwkFdT5GKURticsL7vqD0L1H/KkGxZgTgpus+FqjNhfdJ1V3Ir1PParkM0BwAv
IJMf4cQc6u8/Q==
X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 56297
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
--=-d061YPtVLST8y7WiMTQZ
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Liliana Marie Prikler schreef op wo 29-06-2022 om 12:15 [+0200]:
> Here, it depends.=C2=A0 I think I'd write this as=20
>=20
> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 (native-inputs=C2=A0
> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 (modify-inputs (package-native-input=
s guile-3.0)
> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 (prepend autoconf automa=
ke libtool
> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 flex gperf
> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 gnu-gettext texinfo)))
FWIW, I was thinking of
(native-inputs
(modify-inputs [...]
(prepend autoconf
automake
libtool
flex gperf
gnu-gettext
texinfo)))
, I haven't really thought about putting multiple inputs on a single
line myself.
Greetings,
Maxime.
--=-d061YPtVLST8y7WiMTQZ
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iI0EABYKADUWIQTB8z7iDFKP233XAR9J4+4iGRcl7gUCYrwm3xccbWF4aW1lZGV2
b3NAdGVsZW5ldC5iZQAKCRBJ4+4iGRcl7kY8AP49dfhT3GaF6Uv4wpLEGxnN176/
gMDgCmUe4z1ECruagwEA8/qD8dO3djB5Mv9QRYK0LOXESpkHqgI2e0ADYEDCfQo=
=Mqbt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-d061YPtVLST8y7WiMTQZ--
bug-guix@HIDDEN:bug#56297; Package guix.
Full text available.
Received: (at 56297) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Jun 2022 10:15:09 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jun 29 06:15:09 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57544 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1o6Uiy-0007LP-Ie
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 06:15:08 -0400
Received: from mailrelay.tugraz.at ([129.27.2.202]:41839)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <liliana.prikler@HIDDEN>) id 1o6Uiw-0007LG-Hy
for 56297 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 06:15:07 -0400
Received: from lprikler-laptop.ist.intra (gw.ist.tugraz.at [129.27.202.101])
by mailrelay.tugraz.at (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4LXy526NM0z1LLyW;
Wed, 29 Jun 2022 12:15:02 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mailrelay.tugraz.at 4LXy526NM0z1LLyW
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tugraz.at;
s=mailrelay; t=1656497703;
bh=8kGbGjDEYPAsqPbRXMLDTxhWnFXg5pmrodsxqx8+WN4=;
h=Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
b=Pq5oSHEfWXwiVBYNIJjb3PrwOuvbzLwZClkaw1ftF+Lv8/ZAQQpZULymPFfkmOYKX
uEvKn6b0RR7PpBnXQQ4jvdui4G7lEjpL4QgVIcjQoubiIrBFZ8KMYw5TttpjaUY9cc
Cemh7RH5cR3pTvBMgUYeoMLGaJ2tMvYhn7NTXV3Y=
Message-ID: <1d570330e9811ec9327ec4f99e2baed4fd922194.camel@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: Guix style imperfections
From: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler@HIDDEN>
To: Maxime Devos <maximedevos@HIDDEN>, 56297 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 12:15:02 +0200
In-Reply-To: <9499300db3fe4222f7126240fb2acad3cdf4371b.camel@HIDDEN>
References: <9499300db3fe4222f7126240fb2acad3cdf4371b.camel@HIDDEN>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.42.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-TUG-Backscatter-control: waObeELIUl4ypBWmcn/8wQ
X-Spam-Scanner: SpamAssassin 3.003001
X-Spam-Score-relay: -1.9
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.74 on 129.27.10.116
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 56297
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---)
Am Mittwoch, dem 29.06.2022 um 11:33 +0200 schrieb Maxime Devos:
> Hi,
>
> "guix style" occasionally makes some decision that seem a bit
> questionable to me. More concretely, copy the definition of guile-
> next, put it in a .scm and rename it, and run
> "guix style -L . guile-next-styleme". I get:
Before commenting on the individual points, I do think in general guix
style needs to have a "lax" mode and a "strict" mode where the latter
is enabled via "--strict" and keeps certain snippets as-is. All
elements that save vertical space at the cost of horizontal space
should be disabled in strict mode, whereas they might be acceptable in
lax mode.
> > (define-module (test))
> > (use-modules (guix packages) (guix git-download) (gnu packages
> > autotools) (gnu packages guile) (guix utils)
> > (define-public guile-next
> > (let ((version "3.0.7") (revision "0")
> > (commit "d70c1dbebf9ac0fd45af4578c23983ec4a7da535"))
>
> Conventionally 'revision' is put on another line -- for these kind of
> let bindings, (maybe all?), I would recommend to put all of them on
> separate lines.
Agree.
> > (package
> > (inherit guile-3.0)
> > (name "guile-next-styleme")
> > (version (git-version version revision commit))
> > (source [snip, LGTM])
> > (arguments
> > (substitute-keyword-arguments (package-arguments guile-3.0)
> > ((#:phases phases
> > '%standard-phases) `(modify-phases ,phases
>
> Put %standard-phases on the same line ad #:phases phases and `(modify-
> phases ,phases on a new line
Agree. What's even the point the current style tries to make?
> > (add-before 'check 'skip-failing-
> > tests
> > (lambda _
> > (substitute* "test-
> > suite/standalone/test-out-of-memory"
> > (("!#") "!#
> >
> > (exit 77)
> > "))
>
> I'd prefer the original "!#\n\n(exit 77)\n" here, but I don't know if
> that's something 'Guix style' could feasibly do (there might be
> situations where a newline might be appropriate, how could "guix style"
> which is the case?).
I'd prefer if strict mode typed those out, but we can keep strings "as-
is" in lax mode, supposing they don't grow beyond the horizontal limit.
> > (delete-file
> > "test-suite/tests/version.test")
> > #t))))))
>
> (Would be nice if "guix style" could be taught to remove those #t, but
> that seems more a feature limitation than a bug to me.)
It can still do better by not contracting them imho.
> > (native-inputs (modify-inputs (package-native-inputs guile-3.0)
> > (prepend autoconf
> > automake
> > libtool
> > flex
> > gnu-gettext
> > texinfo
> > gperf)))
>
> I'd consider it tidier to put (modify-inputs ...) on a new line
Here, it depends. I think I'd write this as
(native-inputs
(modify-inputs (package-native-inputs guile-3.0)
(prepend autoconf automake libtool
flex gperf
gnu-gettext texinfo)))
> > (synopsis "Development version of GNU Guile"))))
>
> Question: do people agree with these style choices?
I think some people might actually be okay with a few or even all of
them (juding by how many submit collapsed lets), but I'd like to point
out that they break with Lisp coding guidelines for no good reason.
Regarding the optimization of vertical space, I do think that guix
lacks semantic information to make meaningful choices and thus ought to
either step back when an "informed" user invokes the tool or strictly
take the "least optimal, but correct" approach in strict mode.
Cheers
bug-guix@HIDDEN:bug#56297; Package guix.
Full text available.
Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Jun 2022 09:33:24 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jun 29 05:33:24 2022
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57438 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1o6U4Z-00045W-P5
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 05:33:23 -0400
Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:37714)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <maximedevos@HIDDEN>) id 1o6U4X-00045N-1A
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 05:33:21 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42688)
by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <maximedevos@HIDDEN>)
id 1o6U4W-0005Sb-QN
for bug-guix@HIDDEN; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 05:33:20 -0400
Received: from michel.telenet-ops.be ([2a02:1800:110:4::f00:18]:39314)
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <maximedevos@HIDDEN>)
id 1o6U4U-0008W2-Cp
for bug-guix@HIDDEN; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 05:33:20 -0400
Received: from ptr-bvsjgyhxw7psv60dyze.18120a2.ip6.access.telenet.be
([IPv6:2a02:1811:8c09:9d00:3c5f:2eff:feb0:ba5a])
by michel.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp
id oxZB270034UW6Th06xZBX5; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 11:33:11 +0200
Message-ID: <9499300db3fe4222f7126240fb2acad3cdf4371b.camel@HIDDEN>
Subject: Guix style imperfections
From: Maxime Devos <maximedevos@HIDDEN>
To: bug-guix@HIDDEN
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 11:33:05 +0200
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512";
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-Eo50Gz7S8HCjnRg6uFzR"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.38.3-1
MIME-Version: 1.0
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telenet.be; s=r22;
t=1656495191; bh=/VLN/hd/oX7gtRpEAOLqp6lS2VEcBsJhmqdAmRPgrtQ=;
h=Subject:From:To:Date;
b=duRSLMnwUpkspzwCyWeqnWAHDzhDFNrHxHQLZiz5ZLrGA3IrACUPW5ElyKCVoLVxJ
M2K7OgbhQX95vNgxQk9xLR1jVzi2D8WHNgJc85tq5mqmMYBpEi5QNq4DUJ4HxxsU7w
vUV1X2kWbaT6RCg4Ow+NM+yDizX2DQ/rVzdXOeK19Jo6vbkOPLyE2aZpgYoEqUD76I
5eJAj/c8DeKEOSJAUP/IOTD/wbZnuXwB6R6b2u5XR7dOwPB7DXdvj6XK+mjXBOL5tp
M3CychfkKWnC7YdjXYzOibqbD175WUHyKvYfPXQWp18r/Db4box8Qg9B7lMYdgUmNW
yItdjD1nOAV4g==
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a02:1800:110:4::f00:18;
envelope-from=maximedevos@HIDDEN; helo=michel.telenet-ops.be
X-Spam_score_int: -27
X-Spam_score: -2.8
X-Spam_bar: --
X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,
DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001,
T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
X-Spam_action: no action
X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
--=-Eo50Gz7S8HCjnRg6uFzR
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,
"guix style" occasionally makes some decision that seem a bit
questionable to me. More concretely, copy the definition of guile-
next, put it in a .scm and rename it, and run
"guix style -L . guile-next-styleme". I get:
> (define-module (test))
> (use-modules (guix packages) (guix git-download) (gnu packages autotools)=
(gnu packages guile) (guix utils)
> (define-public guile-next
> (let ((version "3.0.7") (revision "0")
> (commit "d70c1dbebf9ac0fd45af4578c23983ec4a7da535"))
Conventionally 'revision' is put on another line -- for these kind of let b=
indings,
(maybe all?), I would recommend to put all of them on separate lines.
> (package
> (inherit guile-3.0)
> (name "guile-next-styleme")
> (version (git-version version revision commit))
> (source [snip, LGTM])
> (arguments
> (substitute-keyword-arguments (package-arguments guile-3.0)
> ((#:phases phases
> '%standard-phases) `(modify-phases ,phases
Put %standard-phases on the same line ad #:phases phases and `(modify-phase=
s ,phases
on a new lineg=20
> (add-before 'check 'skip-failing-tests
> (lambda _
> (substitute* "test-suite/standalone/t=
est-out-of-memory"
> (("!#") "!#
>
>(exit 77)
>"))
I'd prefer the original "!#\n\n(exit 77)\n" here, but I don't know if that'=
s
something 'Guix style' could feasibly do (there might be situations where a
newline might be appropriate, how could "guix style" which is the case?).
> (delete-file
> "test-suite/tests/version.test") #t)=
)))))
(Would be nice if "guix style" could be taught to remove those #t, but that=
seems
more a feature limitation than a bug to me.)
> (native-inputs (modify-inputs (package-native-inputs guile-3.0)
> (prepend autoconf
> automake
> libtool
> flex
> gnu-gettext
> texinfo
> gperf)))
I'd consider it tidier to put (modify-inputs ...) on a new line
> (synopsis "Development version of GNU Guile"))))
Question: do people agree with these style choices?
Greetings,
Maxime.
--=-Eo50Gz7S8HCjnRg6uFzR
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iI0EABYKADUWIQTB8z7iDFKP233XAR9J4+4iGRcl7gUCYrwcURccbWF4aW1lZGV2
b3NAdGVsZW5ldC5iZQAKCRBJ4+4iGRcl7oJFAP4hReQBKh4e79ZjH4zlWDSf0wxF
fIxX69bkVPNSJJIyAQEAlwFXbrhB8Fk0IRrOgnGHf7qfLhintGcnSxfbthuyQgI=
=yODs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-Eo50Gz7S8HCjnRg6uFzR--
Maxime Devos <maximedevos@HIDDEN>:bug-guix@HIDDEN.
Full text available.bug-guix@HIDDEN:bug#56297; Package guix.
Full text available.
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.