From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add sendmail
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 22:14:44 +0300
Message-ID: <87r38hc95n.fsf@gmail.com>
References: <1474042893-9690-1-git-send-email-jmd@gnu.org>
	<87d1k3t9h3.fsf@gmail.com> <20160917085035.GA23691@jocasta.intra>
	<87d1k2c1d9.fsf@gmail.com> <20160917101107.GA24303@jocasta.intra>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33998)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <alezost@gmail.com>) id 1blj5d-0005UR-SW
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 16:53:31 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <alezost@gmail.com>) id 1blj5d-000166-6w
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 16:53:29 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20160917101107.GA24303@jocasta.intra> (John Darrington's message
	of "Sat, 17 Sep 2016 12:11:07 +0200")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: John Darrington <john@darrington.wattle.id.au>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, John Darrington <jmd@gnu.org>

John Darrington (2016-09-17 12:11 +0200) wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 05:38:26PM +0800, Alex Vong wrote:
[...]
>      >      > +                        "contrib/mmuegel" "devtools/bin/configure.sh")
>      >      > +               (("/bin/sh") (which "bash")))
>      >      > +
>      >      > +             (substitute* "devtools/bin/Build"
>      >      > + (("SHELL=/bin/sh") (string-append "SHELL=" (which "bash"))))
>      >      > +             #t))
>      >      I think the `#t' is not neccessary here, since `substitute*' uses
>      >      `substitute', which will either return #t or throw an exception.
>      >
>      > WTF??  Didn't you complain earlier this week when I *didn't* put #t in
>      > exactly this
>      > scenario??
>      >
>      Yes, I am a different Alex :)
>      Also, it seems we are not being consistent here, sometimes we put `#t'
>      after `substitute*', sometimes we don't. Anyone has an idea?
>
> I did raise some suggestions in my earlier posts.  But again I don't have any strong
> opinion.

I have a strong opinion: if a docstring of a procedure says what value
it returns, we can rely on it, otherwise we should not guess what value
will be returned.  In case of 'substitute*' (and 'substitute'), the
returned value is not specified, so I think if a phase ends with
'substitute*', we should (or even must) add #t after it.

-- 
Alex