Nikita Karetnikov <nik...@karetnikov.org> skribis: >> With the recently-added ‘package-output’ (singular): > >> scheme@(guile-user)> (package-output s binutils "out") >> $2 = "/nix/store/bfh5c2a4is27jdmc811fp6g0jfac7fiw-binutils-2.22" >> scheme@(guile-user)> (package-output s binutils "lib") >> $3 = "/nix/store/n29brzqlhjkzww51labk9anx493gl4d3-binutils-2.22-lib" > > What's the value of 's' here?
(define s (open-connection)) > There is no explanation in the docstrings of 'package-derivation', > 'package-cross-derivation', and 'package-output'. For the ‘store’ parameter you mean? We could add one, but this is a convention shared by (guix derivations) and (guix packages), so I’m not sure docstrings should be “cluttered” this way. > Are you sure that it's OK to have 'package-output' and 'package-outputs' > in the same module? Can we rename one? I agree we should be caution with this sort of names, but I’ve considered it OK. There’s a tension between the length and expressivity of a name. Ludo’.
