From: Thien-Thi Nguyen <ttn@gnuvola.org>
To: Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com>
Cc: "Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org>, guile-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: git push weird?
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 23:56:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87wru0m037.fsf@ambire.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m3ocfchun0.fsf@pobox.com> (Andy Wingo's message of "Tue, 15 Jun 2010 23:07:47 +0200")
() Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com>
() Tue, 15 Jun 2010 23:07:47 +0200
Just for readability I have rebased the commits. The gnulib commit will
get overwritten at the next gnulib import. GUILE_CONFIG_SCRIPT is fine.
OK, thanks for cleaning up my mess.
It's good to have tmpfile, but I wonder about making the port-filename
not a string or #f. 'tmpfile seems too magical to me; if you're working
from scheme you can always associate a tmpfile object property on the
port, and I wouldn't want people to start asking if it's a tmpfile. So I
have changed it to return #f.
Why wouldn't you want people to start asking if it's a tmpfile?
People are curious.
If you really think that 'tmpfile is the right thing, let's talk about
it :)
One way to rationalize 'tmpfile is to consider #f to denote "invalid", in
which case #f for the ‘tmpfile’ (the port-returning proc) does not ring true.
On the other hand, until another file-port with non-string filename type
rears, i have no problem mentally keeping track of:
(port-filename P) => 'tmpfile
===
(and (file-port? P) (not (port-filename P)))
except that ‘file-port?’ does not exist in Guile 1.4.x (another reason to hoof
it over to official Guile :-).
The bigger question is (to touch upon a past discussion) the separation of
"file name" into "directory component + base name". If that ever comes to
pass (fundamentally), i think ‘port-filename’ won't mind transparently
passing the (richer) information to the user, with rv type most likely in
the set {#f, string, location (d+b)}, with some distinguished locations
symbolic. Then we can welcome the return of 'tmpfile.
thi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-15 21:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-15 11:36 git push weird? Thien-Thi Nguyen
2010-06-15 14:41 ` Xiangfu Liu
2010-06-15 17:54 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen
2010-06-15 18:56 ` Ludovic Courtès
2010-06-15 19:39 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen
2010-06-15 20:56 ` Ludovic Courtès
2010-06-15 21:07 ` Andy Wingo
2010-06-15 21:56 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen [this message]
2010-06-15 22:15 ` Andy Wingo
2010-06-16 2:14 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen
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://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87wru0m037.fsf@ambire.localdomain \
--to=ttn@gnuvola.org \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=ludo@gnu.org \
--cc=wingo@pobox.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.
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).