From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id 4G2rAU+Ww2HhXAAAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 22:19:11 +0100 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2 with LMTPS id aODdOE6Ww2F6WwAAB5/wlQ (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 21:19:10 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A47C6AB25 for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 22:19:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1]:43408 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n090v-000283-Nt for larch@yhetil.org; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 16:19:09 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:48712) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n090j-000279-4t for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 16:18:57 -0500 Received: from [2a00:1450:4864:20::344] (port=36616 helo=mail-wm1-x344.google.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n090f-0003MK-KU for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 16:18:54 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-x344.google.com with SMTP id n10-20020a7bc5ca000000b00345c520d38eso1776221wmk.1 for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 13:18:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:subject:from:to:date:in-reply-to:references:user-agent :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=jWdV8YoeJUrfLYxeIb4RVt6WiGm+QZj4YrVDDdLYXa8=; b=hU5rQCIGQWqcsMTgG9KqcT68uHMmEzFolHtMa38qlZ36b8oi1IGuhTt9Oqnwhd0LyB MHKXntuKDkCDJc1LsxxvAjG2/GLqhelbb1/rr8y/W8eg3Wq3QNR+QC2njsAYt1+k57eK ICh3GI29rt29CaiFSOEDnErVyevNsaI3oyftFQtmWxiwgl2iI6TPtJw++5AuJ2NmY9+U Id7GoV+T86xXNcfc6Jrgps0dt7Vqc4aITWM2coDDxpxXLVhYKAIF+UxR9HtDLbaYOPdL m2aIEMuPQBBFgX54mKh7ai7GyiGLon8MvtFt2tHQSMh0QAUv9uVLE6PJggh9Buprb8oc 71sQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:date:in-reply-to :references:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=jWdV8YoeJUrfLYxeIb4RVt6WiGm+QZj4YrVDDdLYXa8=; b=EkiaKU6H7lkzAildOGFhqwvzg1er7rG1dT7j3FaKYmITdQG7BjxICwBTxdGUkkKG9g W6w4f8z5LoddF5nb8ja87WnTnrDPwWRiFOxzmZVxfkLLV04sq4trA+SPvuDrN2drbNar GenxzcvnFc5Ni1T9Nef9a74m6oUW1tG/Tss4UDgBsPpJMxBO2aXGVryozie4SDtxbBFZ t0njPRZi36dFhXDkjzT56mJSCOiB7hrwm9kCS0pF2Zk8xVw+D31GkhNme76l9AJqaKSU 3pYc1joo3W+4JiEIlS5KufpT8D6Tjs6a7MmSIKaotoSklCYr8ZOHY19croCfcUgmG5Dr NsBQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532xE/6ooXntc6YMfO+7+bKVqiRA1o6q8Ys/2VNwPM2SPfRG+Vrh z0emA0WvJnil+RZYOLXtb+E= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyRAMcSsB6uFJX7cCq7QayT4UA/FNmxizbJ4oshusvJYBVx2hQLyounBXexU6I2wIYC26+Erw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:4e4f:: with SMTP id e15mr2072047wmq.67.1640207931615; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 13:18:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from nijino.fritz.box (85-127-52-93.dsl.dynamic.surfer.at. [85.127.52.93]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ay29sm5330676wmb.13.2021.12.22.13.18.50 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 22 Dec 2021 13:18:51 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <23734860fbd9ee8f96b6878aadde0b2a5fe74b69.camel@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Convention for new =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=9Cguix?= =?UTF-8?Q?_style=E2=80=9C=3F?= From: Liliana Marie Prikler To: zimoun , Guix Devel Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 22:18:49 +0100 In-Reply-To: <86bl18sscd.fsf@gmail.com> References: <86bl18sscd.fsf@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.42.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Host-Lookup-Failed: Reverse DNS lookup failed for 2a00:1450:4864:20::344 (failed) Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::344; envelope-from=liliana.prikler@gmail.com; helo=mail-wm1-x344.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -12 X-Spam_score: -1.3 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.3 / 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_NONE=-0.0001, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1640207950; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:list-id:list-help: list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=jWdV8YoeJUrfLYxeIb4RVt6WiGm+QZj4YrVDDdLYXa8=; b=GwyY8qmHAsS0CEsoVYL8kLz2X6bVagnBxaG06rvIN07uDMXEEO2O9WsGa4Hds72BVuh3Ze mvslgkg1M1AIrZCoVp7yfCymbvq1hNJQntBktFgFry4Cds6fdWoB0saSakDHrxvIQkvReA c9OSG7VPP4NOlaCgn/BFYMmSHoXfVWMGI7vgvcShLtURKhS0sq/9S2VIEStXAYOnAC7f6u yLXWaHXrAqb6DUGn4ENPizBCwqVPHVWLb1KSf7k410xng5DxXBmsAQFY0LzC9lKj4EBmyO HllH5OqBVIIQW+GbwYXfWJRLV5e1l8u2sXzRwpxvpzoxdjS2y56NDaXDlkMtpg== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1640207950; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=ayoShseFBZVL90k6glE2kBdn7z1ZXpwIfJFpLUBAv4A96kon2aTM/nXPJrfS/F3YvRI3OL ZxBw/gzYexF3cGPXdRoGZNNd/yKAmc6pGaIZi6TLEQJ+bBx3fNUeYDWEnwZpQMlfVdZGZh Wumvei2vz1RZsg3KSRdwxWGUZULhJO7jZipq8SoGNWLB03IGpyGm0/DOvWIRDKK6GdtJxm uc7C88Y0YA/aP2a6RN+9czziq8YuQV0YI1D9+NlvACwfadO/obPndkaUN749a0a5TLg880 ZWLsZbgOK9ehc7WLrll400JA7EhR7EYsmFqKGuq+mF6jxSFNUWqmUGREctNZ7w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=hU5rQCIG; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -4.54 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=hU5rQCIG; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" X-Migadu-Queue-Id: A47C6AB25 X-Spam-Score: -4.54 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: W652Yg2NXibA Hi, Am Mittwoch, dem 22.12.2021 um 14:05 +0100 schrieb zimoun: > [...] > --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- >     (inputs >      (list libx11 libiberty ;needed for objdump support >            zlib))                       ;also needed for objdump > support > --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- > > when the comments apply to only one line as it was: > > --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- >      `(("libx11" ,libx11) >        ("libiberty" ,libiberty)               ;needed for objdump > support >        ("zlib" ,zlib)))                       ;also needed for > objdump support > --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- > > Other said, this looks better: > > --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- >     (inputs >      (list libx11 >            libiberty ;needed for objdump support >            zlib))    ;also needed for objdump support > --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- > > Obviously, we could come up a rule depending on comments, numbers of > inputs, length, etc.  It was not the case with the old style when > nothing prevented us to do it.  Because one item per line is, IMHO, > easier to maintain. For me personally, this illustrates two things. First, the weakness of line comments over preceding line comments ad second the verbosity of old input style. You could easily write  (list libiberty zlib) ; for objdump in the new style, which you couldn't before. Therefore, I wouldn't mandate a "one line per input" restriction, as the only reason it was ever imposed was a historical limitation. > Consider the case, > >     (inputs >      (list bar foo1 foo2 foo3 foo3 foo4)) > > then another ’baz’ inputs is added, do we end with, > >     (inputs >      (list bar foo1 foo2 foo3 foo3 foo4 >            baz)) > > to minimize and ease reading the diff, or do we end with, > >     (inputs >      (list bar >            baz >            foo1 >            foo2 >            foo3 >            foo3 >            foo4)) > > ?  And the converse is also true, consider the case just above and > what > happens if foo1, foo2 and foo3 are removed. > > One item per line solves all these boring cosmetic questions. > > Therefore, I propose to always have only one item per line.  To be > concrete, for one item: > >   (inputs >    (list foo)) > > or not > >   (inputs (list foo)) > > And for more than one item: > >   (inputs >    (list foo >          bar)) > > This would avoid “cosmetic” changes when adding/removing inputs > and/or comments. In my personal opinion, everything else being equal, changes to inputs/native-inputs/propagated-inputs should (almost) always be seen as changes to the field, as would be documented in the ChangeLog. I think the usual scheme coding guidelines also apply well to inputs, e.g. inline short stuff, but don't do funky things when the lines grow unnecessarily long. Now I am putting aside the issue of tooling here, because I think that humans ought to be able to look at the diff and see that something's wrong and correct it, but as others point out an "I don't touch comments" approach would be very fine by me. Cheers