Re: Feedback on indentation rules

[Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>]

Hi Maxim,

On Tue, 07 Mar 2023 at 11:54, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com> wrote:

>> For what it is worth, I do not see an high difference between the both
>> indentations.  So, my opinion would to keep the current practise.
>
> Please take a look at my original message in this thread,
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2023-02/msg00297.html,
> where I gave examples of gexp->derivation indentations that should
> explain the rationale allow nesting arguments more naturally, as if
> gexp->derivation was a special form (although it's a simple procedure).

Yeah, I have read this rationale before. :-)

My question was somehow directed to Ludo:

        > Yes, that’s my take and current practice so far: special rules for
        > special forms (macros), not for procedures.

        What is the rationale?  Being able to know directly at the location when
        it is a plain function or a special form?

Sorry for having been unclear.

And I do not see a big difference between,

          (gexp->derivation "check-deb-pack"
            (with-imported-modules '((guix build utils))

or

          (gexp->derivation "check-deb-pack"
                            (with-imported-modules '((guix build utils))

It is somehow personal cosmetic and I am sometimes poor person about
cosmetic. ;-)

Well, from my point of view, based on consistency with current
practises, I would be inclined to keep the status quo: special rule for
special form.

Cheers,
simon