Luciana Lima Brito <lubrito@posteo.net> writes:

> On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 14:11:37 +0100
> Christopher Baines <mail@cbaines.net> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>> I think that's better, but you're still taking the matched-outputs,
>> matched-inputs and matched-sources alists, then later making the
>> values vectors rather than lists. The code would be even simpler if
>> you converted to a vector just after the map that produces the
>> relevant lists.
>>
>> I haven't looked to closely at the rest, but it looks like the
>> environment-variables binding is unnecessary, given how simple the bit
>> of code used is, it can just be inlined in the one place where the
>> binding is used.
>
> Done! :)
> I even simplified some other stuff, based on what you said.

Great, I think that looks much simpler.

Some more things to think about:

 - Variable naming, what does the "matched" in matched outputs mean?
   (same goes for the other "matched" things)

 - (if (null? ...), I'm unsure if all of those checks are necessary, I
   believe some fields at least will never be "null?".

 - Builder and arguments grouping, I think this makes sense on the HTML
   page, as they're connected, but does it make sense in the JSON?

I think you're getting close to something that's ready to merge though.

Chris