unofficial mirror of guix-patches@gnu.org 
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>
To: Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hinsen@fastmail.net>
Cc: "Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org>, 40373@debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [bug#40373] [PATCH] guix: new command "guix run-script"
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2020 11:17:19 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJ3okZ386b7bo7ME+CCJ4K=8QnCtq5F4cmhtONYAFnNGEE=BUw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m1a73umkbw.fsf@khs-macbook.home>

Hi Konrad,

On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 at 09:14, Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hinsen@fastmail.net> wrote:

> > What about making that just a new ‘-s’ flag for ‘guix repl’ (just like
> > Guile’s ‘-s’ flag)?  ‘-q’ should always be implied when doing that.
> >
> > Now, this wouldn’t be usable as a shebang due to the fact that only one
> > argument is allowed, unless we do some extra argument tokenizing.
>
> That is one reason why I opted for a separate command.
>
> The other is that I am in tutorial-driven development mode: I need "guix
> run-script" in order to be able to insert my own scripts (for analyzing
> dependencies) into a Guix tutorial for an upcoming MOOC. So I need to
> make sure that people can run my scripts easily, but also that they
> understand what they are doing. A command that does something else than
> its name suggests, with a similarity that is only visible to experts,
> is no good for use in a tutorial.
>
> BTW, I opted for a lengthy name ("run-script" rather than just "run" or
> "script") according to the principle that short words should be left for
> frequently used concepts (a principle respected by human languages, but
> also by Lisp tradition).
>
> I am of course aware that much of the code in "run-script" is the same
> as in "repl", which is not good. But I'd rather think about a better
> framework for code sharing among Guix scripts than about pushing too
> much semantic differences into obscure options. An example would be
> reusable "option clusters", such as "options for Guile" or "options for
> channels".

Initially, I thought the same as Ludo: "run-script" should be an
option to "repl". And I understand your UI concerns.

Maybe, we could deprecated "repl" and add "run" with:
 - guix run <file> (same than the "guix run-script" proposal)
 - guix run or guix run --repl doing the what "guix repl" does.

The new command "guix run" could have more or less the same option
than "guile" but prepending all the paths correctly. I mean we need
something like "guix name-it <otpions>" mimicking "guile <options>"
adding the correct Guix modules, IMHO.


BTW, thank you for this. Because it was missing in my toolbox and I
was annoyed until now.


Cheers,
simon

  reply	other threads:[~2020-04-02  9:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-04-01 14:09 [bug#40373] [PATCH] guix: new command "guix run-script" Konrad Hinsen
2020-04-01 21:00 ` Ludovic Courtès
2020-04-02  7:13   ` Konrad Hinsen
2020-04-02  9:17     ` zimoun [this message]
2020-04-02  9:37       ` Konrad Hinsen
2020-04-03  9:17         ` Konrad Hinsen
2020-04-03  9:48           ` Ludovic Courtès
2020-04-03  9:19         ` [bug#40373] [PATCH] guix: new command "guix run" generalizes "guix repl" Konrad Hinsen
2020-04-03  9:51     ` [bug#40373] [PATCH] guix: new command "guix run-script" Ludovic Courtès
2020-04-07  9:10       ` Konrad Hinsen
2020-04-07 10:36         ` Ludovic Courtès
2020-04-17 11:21           ` zimoun
2020-04-23 10:12             ` Konrad Hinsen
2020-04-23 14:41               ` zimoun
2020-04-29 16:04                 ` Konrad Hinsen
2020-04-30 12:42                   ` zimoun
2020-05-04 13:54                     ` Konrad Hinsen
2020-05-04 17:48                       ` zimoun
2020-05-14  9:29                         ` Konrad Hinsen
2020-05-14  9:44                           ` bug#40373: " zimoun
2020-04-02  9:08 ` [bug#40373] " zimoun
2020-04-02  9:21   ` Konrad Hinsen
2020-04-02  9:25   ` Konrad Hinsen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://guix.gnu.org/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAJ3okZ386b7bo7ME+CCJ4K=8QnCtq5F4cmhtONYAFnNGEE=BUw@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=zimon.toutoune@gmail.com \
    --cc=40373@debbugs.gnu.org \
    --cc=konrad.hinsen@fastmail.net \
    --cc=ludo@gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).