bug#57090: [BUG] Default Notation for chmod in guix style?

bug#57090: [BUG] Default Notation for chmod in guix style?

[Christopher Rodriguez]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 422 bytes --]


Hello,

I've noticed that, when I explicitly declare absolute permissions in
octal during a (chmod …) in my package definitions and then run guix
style, it converts them to decimal instead.

Is this intended? I've gotten feedback and agree that octal (#o755) is
much clearer to read than decimal (493), simply because I'm used to the
actual unix chmod tool and its conventions.

--

Christopher Rodriguez

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]

bug#57090: [BUG] Default Notation for chmod in guix style?

[Maxime Devos]

[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 994 bytes --]

Note: No need for [BUG] prefixes -- they are prefixed automatically by 
bug#NNNNN and the bug tracker is either for bugs or patches, and the 
latter has the [PATCH ...] convention. No harm though.

On 09-08-2022 22:47, Christopher Rodriguez wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've noticed that, when I explicitly declare absolute permissions in
> octal during a (chmod …) in my package definitions and then run guix
> style, it converts them to decimal instead.
>
> Is this intended? I've gotten feedback and agree that octal (#o755) is
> much clearer to read than decimal (493), simply because I'm used to the
> actual unix chmod tool and its conventions.
>
> --
>
> Christopher Rodriguez

'chmod' is not mentioned anywhere in (guix scripts style), so I'd think 
it's just an oversight. The authority on the matter would be Ludovic 
Courtès <ludo@gnu.org>

Disclaimer: I'm the one that wrote that feedback. Let's not double-count 
my non-existent 'votes'.

Greetings,
Maxime


[-- Attachment #1.1.2: OpenPGP public key --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 929 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 236 bytes --]

bug#57090: [BUG] Default Notation for chmod in guix style?

[Csepp]

Christopher Rodriguez <yewscion@gmail.com> writes:

> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
>
> Hello,
>
> I've noticed that, when I explicitly declare absolute permissions in
> octal during a (chmod …) in my package definitions and then run guix
> style, it converts them to decimal instead.
>
> Is this intended? I've gotten feedback and agree that octal (#o755) is
> much clearer to read than decimal (493), simply because I'm used to the
> actual unix chmod tool and its conventions.

Seems to be a Scheme limitation:

```
scheme@(guile-user)> '(#o10)
$1 = (8)
```

bug#57090: [BUG] Default Notation for chmod in guix style?

[paren--- via Bug reports for GNU Guix]

On Tue Aug 9, 2022 at 9:59 PM BST, Maxime Devos wrote:
> 'chmod' is not mentioned anywhere in (guix scripts style), so I'd think 
> it's just an oversight. The authority on the matter would be Ludovic 
> Courtès <ludo@gnu.org>

Is it possible that (guix read-print) stores octal numbers directly as
Scheme numbers, with no way to distinguish them from decimal numbers,
which means when they are printed they are just treated as base10? I
poked around a bit in the module but couldn't find the code for number
reading.

    -- (

bug#57090: [BUG] Default Notation for chmod in guix style?

[paren--- via Bug reports for GNU Guix]

On Tue Aug 9, 2022 at 10:01 PM BST, Csepp wrote:
> Seems to be a Scheme limitation:
>
> ```
> scheme@(guile-user)> '(#o10)
> $1 = (8)
> ```

`guix style` uses a completely seperate reader, defined
in (guix read-print), so even though it's possible it has
the same limitation, we could easily modify it to support
octal/hexadecimal/binary numbers.

    -- (

bug#57090: [BUG] Default Notation for chmod in guix style?

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi,

"(" <paren@disroot.org> skribis:

> On Tue Aug 9, 2022 at 9:59 PM BST, Maxime Devos wrote:
>> 'chmod' is not mentioned anywhere in (guix scripts style), so I'd think 
>> it's just an oversight. The authority on the matter would be Ludovic 
>> Courtès <ludo@gnu.org>
>
> Is it possible that (guix read-print) stores octal numbers directly as
> Scheme numbers, with no way to distinguish them from decimal numbers,
> which means when they are printed they are just treated as base10? I
> poked around a bit in the module but couldn't find the code for number
> reading.

Indeed, the reader is basically a wrapper around ‘read’.  It preserves
comments and vertical space, but it doesn’t attempt to preserve the
style of numbers (base, etc.), strings (whether \n & co. are escaped or
literal), and so on.  I think that’d be a bit too much honestly.

Now, we could tweak the pretty printer so that it recognizes patterns
where numbers or strings should be printed in a certain way.

Help welcome! :-)

Ludo’.

bug#57090: 'guix style' pretty-printer always renders integers as base10

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi,

Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> skribis:

> Now, we could tweak the pretty printer so that it recognizes patterns
> where numbers or strings should be printed in a certain way.

I did that in c3b1cfe76b7038f4030d7d207ffc417fed9a7ead.  Lemme know how
you like it!  :-)

Ludo’.