From: Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be>
To: "Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org>
Cc: iskarian@mgsn.dev, 50286@debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [bug#50286] [RFC PATCH] Let 'package-location' returns location of surrounding 'let'.
Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2021 22:30:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bf72805457ca80af977ee856c775bf1988034ed9.camel@telenet.be> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <875yvc4254.fsf_-_@gnu.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2704 bytes --]
Ludovic Courtès schreef op di 07-09-2021 om 21:27 [+0200]:
> Hi Maxime & Sarah,
>
> Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> skribis:
>
> > Hmm, thinking out loud, what about this: use the same trick as you did,
> > but replace ‘define-public’ instead of ‘let’ & co., so as to be less
> > intrusive.
> >
> > (define-syntax-parameter current-definition-location
> > (identifier-syntax #f))
> >
> > (define-syntax define-public*
> > (syntax-rules ()
> > ((_ prototype body)
> > (define-public prototype
> > (syntax-parameterize ((current-definition-location
> > (identifier-syntax (current-source-location))))
> > body)))))
> >
> > Since there’s code that assumes ‘package-location’ returns the location
> > of the (package …) sexp, we could add a ‘definition-location’ field in
> > <package>, defaulting to ‘current-definition-location’, or tweak
> > ‘location’ to include both.
>
> Below is an attempt at doing this. As discussed on IRC, the first patch
> switches the ‘location’ field to a more compact format that may reduce
> load time by a tiny bit, though it’s hard to measure.
> The second patch
> introduces an extra field for the definition location; that means that
> <package> records now occupy an extra word, which is not great, but
> unfortunately OTOH location is slightly smaller.
Why not always let the location of a package be the location of the
surrounding define-public* form, instead of having two separate
locations? Letting the location of a package be the location of the
define-public* form (or 'let' form) seems more useful to people using
"guix edit minetest-etheral" for example, and the package-field-location
code can easily be adjusted to support 'define-public*' (or let) forms.
If two separate package-definition-location and package-location are
introduced, what should "guix show minetest-ethereal" show? The location
of the 'package' form, the location of the 'let' form or the location
of the 'define-public' form?
Having two separate define-public* and define-public macros might be a
little confusing. Would it be possible to let 'define-public*' replace
'define-public'?
I don't really have an opinion on whether package-[field-]location should
return the location of the 'let' form or the location of the 'define-public'
form. I think 'package-location' should return the location of the 'let'
form (or a surrounding form), because the 'commit' and 'version' variable
from the 'let' form are part of the package -- change them, and you'll
get a different package.
Greetings,
Maxime
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 260 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-07 20:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-08-30 21:26 [bug#50286] [RFC PATCH] Let 'package-location' returns location of surrounding 'let' Maxime Devos
2021-09-06 10:07 ` Ludovic Courtès
2021-09-07 19:27 ` Ludovic Courtès
2021-09-07 20:15 ` Sarah Morgensen
2021-09-08 13:45 ` Ludovic Courtès
2021-09-07 20:30 ` Maxime Devos [this message]
2021-09-08 13:38 ` Ludovic Courtès
2021-09-13 10:37 ` bug#50286: " Ludovic Courtès
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=bf72805457ca80af977ee856c775bf1988034ed9.camel@telenet.be \
--to=maximedevos@telenet.be \
--cc=50286@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=iskarian@mgsn.dev \
--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).