-CC bug#61255
+CC guix-devel
Hi Ludovic and guix-devel readers,
Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> writes:
> Hi,
>
> Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.courno...@gmail.com> skribis:
>
>> Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> writes:
>>
[...]
>>> I’m not convinced by the indentation rule for ‘gexp->derivation’ added
>>> in 82daab42811a2e3c7684ebdf12af75ff0fa67b99: there’s no reason to treat
>>> ‘gexp->derivation’ differently from other procedures.
>>
>> The benefit I saw was that writing
>>
>> (gexp->derivation the-name
>> #~(begin
>> (the
>> (multi-line
>> (gexp)))))
>
> I understand, but you know, it’s best to avoid unilaterally changing
> established conventions. :-)
>
> If and when there’s consensus about this change, (guix read-print)
> should be updated.
OK. I'm not against soliciting more opinions; I'm CC'ing guix-devel,
hoping some opinionated individuals tip in on this 2021
82daab42811a2e3c7684ebdf12af75ff0fa67b99 commit, more specifically, the
part that change the indentation rules for .dir-locals.el like this:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
+ (eval . (put 'gexp->derivation 'scheme-indent-function 1))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
In the same spirit there was also
b1c25e2ce364741d1c257d3bb3ab773032807a80 (".dir-locals.el: Add
indentation rule for computed-file.") made more recently (last month).
The idea was to be able to format gexp->derivation like this:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(gexp->derivation "check-deb-pack"
(with-imported-modules '((guix build utils))
#~(begin
(use-modules (guix build utils)
(ice-9 match)
(ice-9 popen)
(ice-9 rdelim)
(ice-9 textual-ports)
(rnrs base))
[...]
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
Rather than like this:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(gexp->derivation "check-deb-pack"
(with-imported-modules '((guix build utils))
#~(begin
(use-modules (guix build utils)
(ice-9 match)
(ice-9 popen)
(ice-9 rdelim)
(ice-9 textual-ports)
(rnrs base))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
(or having to use another 'builder' variable, for example).
What do you all think?
--
Thanks,
Maxim
