From: "Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org>
To: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: A plan for parameterized packages
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 12:54:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87r1oty0sx.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <86v9e6seqq.fsf@gmail.com> (zimoun's message of "Sun, 15 Nov 2020 18:37:33 +0100")
Hi,
zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> skribis:
>> To me the requirements for package parameters are:
>>
>> 1. it must be possible to discover them and choose them from the UI;
>>
>> 2. they must contain on-line internationalized documentation such that
>> the UI can list a package’s parameters and their type;
>
> Except ’boolean’, which kind of type do you have in mind? Aside that
> you did not find examples of packages requiring parameters. ;-)
Another example would be enumerated types.
>> 3. the chosen parameters when installing a package in a profile must
>> be preserved;
>
> You mean track the parameters with ’properties’ in <profile>/manifest,
> right?
Yup!
>> 4. it must be possible to enumerate all the possible values of a
>> parameter, and thus to build the Cartesian product of all the
>> possible parameter combinations of a package (or of a package
>> graph!), so we can test those combinations as much as possible.
>
> The values of the option are therefore known at package time, right?
> However, this implies restricted possibility for the type, right?
The <package-parameter> record has to specify a type, and the type must
have a finite universe. So there cannot be an “integer” type, for
instance, but there can be “integer between 10 and 42”.
>> +(define (evaluate-parameter-specs specs proc)
>> + "Parse SPECS, a list of strings like \"bitlbee=purple=true\", and return a
>> +list of spec/procedure pairs, where (PROC PACKAGE PARAMETER VALUE) is called
>> +to return the replacement package. Raise an error if an element of SPECS uses
>> +invalid syntax, or if a package it refers to could not be found."
>> + (map (lambda (spec)
>> + (match (string-tokenize spec %not-equal)
>> + ((spec name value)
>> + (define (replace old)
>> + (proc old name value))
>> +
>> + (cons spec replace))
>> + (_
>> + (raise
>> + (formatted-message
>> + (G_ "invalid package parameter specification: ~s")
>> + spec)))))
>> + specs))
>
> Here ’proc’ could be anything, right? But then…
>
>> +(define (transform-package-parameters replacement-specs)
>> + "Return a procedure that, when passed a package, replaces its direct
>> +dependencies according to REPLACEMENT-SPECS. REPLACEMENT-SPECS is a list of
>> +strings like \"guile-next=stable-3.0\" meaning that packages are built using
>> +'guile-next' from the latest commit on its 'stable-3.0' branch."
>> + (define (replace old name value)
>> + (set-package-parameter-value old name value))
>> +
>> + (let* ((replacements (evaluate-parameter-specs replacement-specs
>> + replace))
>> + (rewrite (package-input-rewriting/spec replacements)))
>> + (lambda (obj)
>> + (if (package? obj)
>> + (rewrite obj)
>> + obj))))
>
> … it is ’set-package-parameter-value’. It is not clear in my mind.
Yes I could have used ‘set-package-parameter-value’ directly instead of
adding this ‘proc’ parameter; it would have been more readable I guess!
Thanks,
Ludo’.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-16 11:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-15 16:33 A plan for parameterized packages Ludovic Courtès
2020-11-15 17:30 ` Nicolò Balzarotti
2020-11-15 17:40 ` Nicolò Balzarotti
2020-11-15 17:44 ` Pierre Neidhardt
2020-11-15 18:09 ` zimoun
2020-11-16 11:50 ` Ludovic Courtès
2020-11-16 12:03 ` Pierre Neidhardt
2020-11-16 14:05 ` zimoun
2020-11-15 17:37 ` zimoun
2020-11-16 11:54 ` Ludovic Courtès [this message]
2020-11-15 18:51 ` Taylan Kammer
2020-11-15 20:46 ` Danny Milosavljevic
2020-11-15 21:16 ` zimoun
2020-11-16 11:25 ` Make mutiple packages from outputs (Was: A plan for parameterized packages) 宋文武
2020-11-16 14:53 ` Make mutiple packages from outputs Ludovic Courtès
2020-11-16 15:10 ` Make mutiple packages from outputs (Was: A plan for parameterized packages) zimoun
2020-11-15 21:24 ` A plan for parameterized packages raingloom
2020-11-16 1:54 ` Ryan Prior
2020-11-16 5:38 ` Clozure size zimoun
2020-11-18 1:30 ` A plan for parameterized packages Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli
2020-11-20 11:39 ` Ludovic Courtès
2020-11-20 14:38 ` zimoun
2020-11-20 19:44 ` Christopher Baines
2020-11-16 14:51 ` Ludovic Courtès
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-11-17 14:25 Stephen Christie
2020-11-17 15:31 ` Ludovic Courtès
2020-11-17 18:13 ` Stephen Christie
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://guix.gnu.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87r1oty0sx.fsf@gnu.org \
--to=ludo@gnu.org \
--cc=guix-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=zimon.toutoune@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).