From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Kost Subject: Re: [PATCH] refresh: Support comma separated updater types. Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 21:54:20 +0300 Message-ID: <87k2q6ygbn.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87d1w8crgs.fsf@gnu.org> <874mhj9v1s.fsf@gmail.com> <87eggik4lg.fsf@gnu.org> <87lhaoqgqa.fsf_-_@gmail.com> <87r3kgawvm.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 ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48765) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZrVrd-0001vP-FI for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 14:54:26 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZrVrY-0001FQ-Fc for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 14:54:25 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87r3kgawvm.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Tue, 27 Oct 2015 21:18:21 +0100") 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.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: guix-devel Ludovic Court=C3=A8s (2015-10-27 23:18 +0300) wrote: > Alex Kost skribis: > >> From 4a5132f171dfe6bac99661e75e7c5e53c4f74116 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >> From: Alex Kost >> Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2015 21:13:05 +0300 >> Subject: [PATCH] refresh: Support comma separated updater types. >> >> * guix/scripts/refresh.scm (%options): Handle comma separated types for >> '--type' option. >> (guix-refresh): Adjust accordingly. >> (show-help): Likewise. >> * doc/guix.texi (Invoking guix refresh): Document it. > > [...] > >> + (let ((names (map string->symbol (string-split arg #\= ,)))) > > I prefer =E2=80=98string-tokenize=E2=80=99, which is standard, even thoug= h it=E2=80=99s more > verbose. OK. Do you mean that =E2=80=98string-split=E2=80=99 is non-standard? Why? >> + (lists >> + (apply append lists)))) > > Rather: (concatenate lists). Thanks, I didn't know about 'concatenate'. > OK with these changes. Thanks, pushed. --=20 Alex