From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ricardo Wurmus Subject: Re: Speeding up =?utf-8?B?4oCcZ3VpeCBwdWxs4oCdOg==?= splitting modules Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 20:02:53 +0100 Message-ID: <87eew7yw0y.fsf@elephly.net> References: <87k1657i7j.fsf@elephly.net> <87zhexd3ec.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43400) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ipzZ6-0006k8-5G for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2020 14:03:25 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ipzZ5-00035G-08 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2020 14:03:24 -0500 In-reply-to: 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+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: zimoun Cc: Guix Devel zimoun writes: > On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 22:50, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: >> Ricardo Wurmus skribis: > >> > On the other hand: this would need to be an ongoing effort. Newly >> > introduced packages or even new features might create complex module >> > cycles. It sounds tedious to keep track of this and to enforce >> > boundaries. >> >> Yes, I think this is a dead end: glibc could well end up become on >> Haskell (hi, Pandoc!), and then the whole module split effort collapses. > > What kind of metrics could help to detect which modules are going to > the wrong way? > For example, would some DAG post-processings help? I don=E2=80=99t think it=E2=80=99s feasible to clean up the module graph in= a way that can be kept clean long enough. Ideally we wouldn=E2=80=99t need to think a= bout Guile modules at all, so the best screw to turn appears to be in the Guile compiler and not in Guix. -- Ricardo