From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com>
To: Attila Lendvai <attila@lendvai.name>
Cc: 56799@debbugs.gnu.org, "Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org>
Subject: bug#56799: (gnu services configuration) usage of *unspecified* is problematic
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2022 22:57:05 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87k07bbkhq.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <LcBPqqwfDX-ocq33gMceJ5v3oPKpzFa0An1IioV3YrWAkOgnq3aBURwqrDMSNVrbwQqxFeUGzBVVaC5fKUMY4k3r_6L82eSnNcA_uGSsnyA=@lendvai.name> (Attila Lendvai's message of "Sat, 13 Aug 2022 16:47:05 +0000")
Hi Attila,
Attila Lendvai <attila@lendvai.name> writes:
[...]
>> prepare a patch for the other things mentionned here (an exported
>> symbol).
Thanks!
> i started implementing your suggestions, including the replacement of
> the scattered usage of (eq? 'unset ...) pattern. what i found is that
> the code is not very readable using MAYBE-VALUE-SET?, or at least not
> for me.
>
> first, it negates the boolean logic everywhere in the current code
> (i.e. larger diff, and/or the use of (if (not ...) a b)).
>
> and an example wrt readability:
>
> (if (maybe-value-set? field-default)
> field-default
> (configuration-missing-default-value ...)
>
> a value is never set, only places can be set to some value.
It's not clear to me why you think the above is less readable; in the
code I had to touch, the maybe-value-set? was more natural, as the cases
I dealt with often tested for (not (eq? 'unset ...)), so reversing the
logic allowed getting rid of the negation. See
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/57168#13 for example.
>
> would you be fine if we renamed MAYBE-VALUE-SET? to UNSET-VALUE?
unset-value? sounds like an action; so I'd name it 'maybe-value-unset?';
but as I wrote above I don't really see the benefit/like the idea.
Thanks for working on it!
Maxim
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-14 2:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-27 16:23 bug#56799: (gnu services configuration) usage of *unspecified* is problematic Maxim Cournoyer
2022-07-27 16:43 ` Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Bug reports for GNU Guix
2022-07-27 18:27 ` Attila Lendvai
2022-07-28 15:15 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2022-07-27 18:31 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2022-07-27 18:45 ` Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Bug reports for GNU Guix
2022-07-27 19:09 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2022-07-27 19:45 ` bug#56799: [PATCH] services: configuration: Step back from *unspecified* Maxim Cournoyer
2022-07-27 19:46 ` bug#56799: (gnu services configuration) usage of *unspecified* is problematic Maxim Cournoyer
2022-07-27 20:20 ` bug#56799: [PATCH v2] gexp: Handle *unspecified* as a gexp input Maxim Cournoyer
2022-07-27 21:43 ` Maxime Devos
2022-07-28 14:58 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2022-07-28 4:41 ` bug#56799: [PATCH v3] " Maxim Cournoyer
2022-08-01 5:08 ` bug#56799: (gnu services configuration) usage of *unspecified* is problematic Maxim Cournoyer
2022-08-01 10:00 ` Maxime Devos
2022-08-01 12:46 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2022-08-01 13:44 ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-08-01 16:55 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2022-07-28 4:55 ` bokr
2022-07-28 10:26 ` Maxime Devos
2022-07-28 15:09 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2022-08-01 13:49 ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-08-01 15:55 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2022-08-02 7:31 ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-08-02 8:45 ` bokr
2022-08-02 15:06 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2022-08-04 12:19 ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-08-07 22:44 ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-08-08 22:27 ` Attila Lendvai
2022-08-08 23:35 ` Attila Lendvai
2022-08-10 2:17 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2022-08-10 3:26 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2022-08-11 10:15 ` Attila Lendvai
2022-08-13 6:31 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2022-08-13 16:47 ` Attila Lendvai
2022-08-14 2:57 ` Maxim Cournoyer [this message]
2022-08-16 14:00 ` Attila Lendvai
2022-08-17 13:16 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2022-08-17 16:00 ` paren--- via Bug reports for GNU Guix
2022-08-10 0:43 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2022-08-24 12:40 ` bug#56799: [PATCH 1/5] services: configuration: Add a 'maybe-value-set?' procedure Attila Lendvai
2022-08-24 12:40 ` bug#56799: [PATCH 2/5] services: configuration: Add %unset-value exported variable Attila Lendvai
2022-08-24 12:40 ` bug#56799: [PATCH 3/5] services: configuration: Add maybe-value exported procedure Attila Lendvai
2022-08-24 12:40 ` bug#56799: [PATCH 4/5] services: Use the new maybe/unset API Attila Lendvai
2022-08-25 4:18 ` bug#56799: (gnu services configuration) usage of *unspecified* is problematic Maxim Cournoyer
2022-08-24 12:40 ` bug#56799: [PATCH 5/5] services: configuration: Change the value of the unset marker Attila Lendvai
2022-08-25 4:14 ` bug#56799: (gnu services configuration) usage of *unspecified* is problematic Maxim Cournoyer
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=87k07bbkhq.fsf@gmail.com \
--to=maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com \
--cc=56799@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=attila@lendvai.name \
--cc=ludo@gnu.org \
/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).