Alex Kost <alez...@gmail.com> skribis: > Ludovic Courtès (2015-09-27 23:29 +0300) wrote: > >> Alex Kost <alez...@gmail.com> skribis: >> > [...] >>> The following code may be used to handle this indentation: >>> >>> (defun guix-devel-package-indent (state indent-point normal-indent) >>> (let ((count (if (and (ignore-errors (down-list) t) >>> (looking-at "inherit\\>")) >>> 1 >>> 0))) >>> (lisp-indent-specform count state indent-point normal-indent))) >>> >>> (put 'package 'scheme-indent-function 'guix-devel-package-indent) >> >> Nice! I like it, I think it would be a nice addition. >> >> At the same time I wonder if defining sophisticated indentation rules is >> a good idea in general. (Though this one was already defined anyway.) > > I agree that it's better to avoid unusual indentation rules. > > Actually I don't like that ‘inherit’ field is treated specially, I would > leave it as usual:
Yeah I ended up doing that quite often lately. > But since the inherited packages have the form: > > (package (inherit foo) > (name "foo") > ...) > > I thought this is an existing rule, so I came up with that indentation > function. It is, but until now scheme-mode wouldn’t DTRT. :-) >> Good question. .dir-locals.el includes a bunch of internal rules that >> do not make sense outside. >> >> For those who do make sense outside, such as rules for ‘package’, I >> think having them in .dir-locals.el has the advantage that Emacs users >> cannot escape them inadvertently. With guix-devel.el, there’s a greater >> chance of people not loading it. >> >> Unless .dir-locals.el has something like: >> >> (eval . (load "emacs/guix-devel.el")) ;… >> >> ? > > I am against this. At first it is ugly; besides don't forget that it > means "guix-devel.el" will be loaded *each time* you open a scheme file > from the guix git directory. > > More generally, I'm strongly against using "eval" in .dir-locals. IMO > this file should be used only to set local variables, and ideally it > shouldn't evaluate an arbitrary code. > >> Thoughts? > > So I think .dir-locals.el is not the proper place for indentation rules. > IMHO they should be moved to "guix-devel.el" and the manual should > recommend using 'guix-devel-mode' for editing guix package files as it > provides the proper indenting, highlighting and some useful key > bindings. Yes, but I agree with Taylan: a passerby should get a reasonable setup in place automatically. That’s what I like about .dir-locals.el: it allows you to make sure that a minimum set of rules is in place, which in turn means that patches are more likely to come out right, which means less frustration and increased happiness. Using eval + load in .dir-locals.el is indeed ugly though. So, for lack of a better solution, I’m fine having some of the rules duplicated. Specifically, rules for ‘package’, ‘origin’, ‘operating-system’, ‘substitute*’, ‘with-store’, ‘with-monad’, ‘run-with-store’, ‘run-with-state’, and ‘m…’. How does that sound? Ludo’.
