From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>
To: Olivier Dion <olivier.dion@polymtl.ca>
Cc: gwl-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] packages: Support for full Guix specification
Date: Sun, 22 May 2022 08:43:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87h75ijbr7.fsf@elephly.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220429180247.17830-2-olivier.dion@polymtl.ca>
Hi Olivier,
thanks for the new patch and my apologies for the delay!
It looks fine, but I can’t help but feel a little confused about what
variables are actual package values and what are wrappers. Sometimes we
have a variable called “packages”, but it’s seemingly always going to be
package wrappers, so we map “package-unwrap”.
I wonder if there’s a way to hide this machinery somewhat. On the other
hand, “package-unwrap” is a no-op for actual packages, so it doesn’t
really matter.
> +(define package-native-inputs
> + (match-lambda
> + ((? package? pkg)
> + (package-native-inputs pkg))
> + ((? inferior-package? pkg)
> + (inferior-package-native-inputs pkg))
> + ((? package-wrapper? pkg)
> + (package-native-inputs (package-wrapper-package pkg)))))
I’m confused about the naming. Is this a recursive application of
PACKAGE-NATIVE-INPUTS? Or are these two different implementations of
PACKAGE-NATIVE-INPUTS, one from GWL and the other from Guix?
> (define (lookup-package specification)
> (log-event 'guix (G_ "Looking up package `~a'~%") specification)
> - (match (lookup-inferior-packages (current-guix) specification)
> - ((first . rest) first)
> - (_ (raise (condition
> - (&gwl-package-error
> - (package-spec specification)))))))
> + (let-values (((name version output)
> + (package-specification->name+version+output
> + specification)))
> + (let* ((inferior-package
> + (lookup-inferior-packages (current-guix)
> + name version))
> + (package (match inferior-package
> + ((first . rest) first)
> + (_ (raise (condition
> + (&gwl-package-error
> + (package-spec specification))))))))
> + (make-package-wrapper package output))))
I think this would be slightly improved by using SRFI-71 instead of
LET-VALUES. SRFI-71 replaces LET and LET* so that you can assign
multiple values without needing to be explicit about it.
Since this procedure is now a bit more complicated I think it would be
good to have a docstring that mentions the input and output values.
> (define default-guile
> (mlambda ()
> "Return the variant of Guile that was used to build the \"guix\"
> package, which provides all library features used by the GWL. We use
> this Guile to run scripts."
> - (and=> (assoc-ref (inferior-package-native-inputs (build-time-guix))
> + (and=> (assoc-ref (package-native-inputs (build-time-guix))
> "guile") first)))
Is this correct? BUILD-TIME-GUIX has been changed so that the return
value is an unwrapped wrapper — so it really is an inferior package.
Does PACKAGE-NATIVE-INPUTS refer to the implementation here or that in
Guix?
I think it would be best if we can make all this unambiguous.
--
Ricardo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-22 6:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-21 17:22 Packages specification does not work Olivier Dion via
2022-04-21 18:25 ` Olivier Dion via
2022-04-21 19:51 ` [PATCH v1 1/2] packages: Support for full Guix specification Olivier Dion
2022-04-21 19:51 ` [PATCH v1 2/2] pre-inst-env.in: Export GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH Olivier Dion
2022-04-29 11:42 ` Ricardo Wurmus
2022-04-21 20:10 ` [PATCH v1 1/2] packages: Support for full Guix specification Olivier Dion via
2022-04-22 18:43 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] Support full package specifications Olivier Dion
2022-04-22 18:43 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] packages: Support for full Guix specification Olivier Dion
2022-04-26 18:11 ` Ricardo Wurmus
2022-04-26 18:59 ` Olivier Dion via
2022-04-26 20:30 ` Ricardo Wurmus
2022-04-26 21:52 ` Olivier Dion via
2022-04-22 18:43 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] pre-inst-env.in: Export GUIX_EXTENSIONS_PATH Olivier Dion
2022-04-29 9:00 ` zimoun
2022-04-29 18:02 ` [PATCH v3 0/1] Support full package specifications Olivier Dion
2022-04-29 18:02 ` [PATCH v3 1/1] packages: Support for full Guix specification Olivier Dion
2022-05-22 6:43 ` Ricardo Wurmus [this message]
2022-05-22 12:33 ` Olivier Dion via
2022-05-17 20:40 ` [PATCH v3 0/1] Support full package specifications Olivier Dion via
2022-05-22 12:38 ` [PATCH v4] packages: Support for full Guix specification Olivier Dion
2022-05-23 21:02 ` Ricardo Wurmus
2022-05-23 21:45 ` [PATCH v5] " Olivier Dion
2022-06-01 13:07 ` Ricardo Wurmus
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://www.guixwl.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87h75ijbr7.fsf@elephly.net \
--to=rekado@elephly.net \
--cc=gwl-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=olivier.dion@polymtl.ca \
/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.
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).