From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38112) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1j0PK8-0004df-F2 for gwl-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Feb 2020 07:35:01 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1j0PK7-0004Yx-GZ for gwl-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Feb 2020 07:35:00 -0500 References: <871rrdthmz.fsf@elephly.net> From: Ricardo Wurmus Subject: Re: Comments on process template syntax In-reply-to: Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2020 13:34:46 +0100 Message-ID: <87imkhp89l.fsf@elephly.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: gwl-devel-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "gwl-devel" To: zimoun Cc: gwl-devel@gnu.org zimoun writes: >> Maybe we can just clarify the feature better in the documentation. >> Here's my initial thought: >> --- >> When defining processes, they can be parameterized by turning the >> process definition into a procedure, which will form a template for >> processes to be defined later. This is done by adding a name for the >> template, and its parameters directly after "process:". >> --- > > I agree. The documentation now has a dedicated section about process templates. -- Ricardo