GNU bug report logs - #28274
[PATCH] gnu: Add fold-packages-in-modules.

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 28274 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 28274 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Christopher Baines <mail <at> cbaines.net>
To: guix-patches <at> gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Add fold-packages-in-modules.
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2017 08:07:23 +0100

Add a more flexible variant of the fold-packages procedure, that takes a list
of the modules to work with. The existing fold-packages procedure then calls
fold-packages-in-modules with the result of the all-modules procedure.

I wrote this when looking at how to get the packages in a specific set of
modules, to create jobs for cuirass.

* gnu/packages.scm (fold-packages-in-modules): New procedure.
  (fold-packages): Change to use fold-packages-in-modules.
---
 gnu/packages.scm | 11 ++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/gnu/packages.scm b/gnu/packages.scm
index 562906178..3f0ff56b8 100644
--- a/gnu/packages.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages.scm
@@ -47,6 +47,7 @@
             %bootstrap-binaries-path
             %package-module-path
 
+            fold-packages-in-modules
             fold-packages
 
             find-packages-by-name
@@ -144,13 +145,21 @@ for system '~a'")
   "Call (PROC PACKAGE RESULT) for each available package, using INIT as
 the initial value of RESULT.  It is guaranteed to never traverse the
 same package twice."
+  (fold-packages-in-modules (all-modules (%package-module-path))
+                            proc
+                            init))
+
+(define (fold-packages-in-modules modules proc init)
+  "Call (PROC PACKAGE RESULT) for each available package within any of the
+modules in MODULES, using INIT as the initial value of RESULT.  It is
+guaranteed to never traverse the same package twice."
   (fold-module-public-variables (lambda (object result)
                                   (if (and (package? object)
                                            (not (hidden-package? object)))
                                       (proc object result)
                                       result))
                                 init
-                                (all-modules (%package-module-path))))
+                                modules))
 
 (define find-packages-by-name
   (let ((packages (delay
-- 
2.14.1

Message #8 received at 28274 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Christopher Baines <mail <at> cbaines.net>
Cc: 28274 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#28274] [PATCH] gnu: Add fold-packages-in-modules.
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2017 15:20:55 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Christopher Baines <mail <at> cbaines.net> skribis:

> Add a more flexible variant of the fold-packages procedure, that takes a list
> of the modules to work with. The existing fold-packages procedure then calls
> fold-packages-in-modules with the result of the all-modules procedure.
>
> I wrote this when looking at how to get the packages in a specific set of
> modules, to create jobs for cuirass.
>
> * gnu/packages.scm (fold-packages-in-modules): New procedure.
>   (fold-packages): Change to use fold-packages-in-modules.

[...]

> +(define (fold-packages-in-modules modules proc init)
> +  "Call (PROC PACKAGE RESULT) for each available package within any of the
> +modules in MODULES, using INIT as the initial value of RESULT.  It is
> +guaranteed to never traverse the same package twice."
>    (fold-module-public-variables (lambda (object result)
>                                    (if (and (package? object)
>                                             (not (hidden-package? object)))
>                                        (proc object result)
>                                        result))
>                                  init
> -                                (all-modules (%package-module-path))))
> +                                modules))

Instead of introducing a new procedure, what about simply:

[Message part 2 (text/x-patch, inline)]

diff --git a/gnu/packages.scm b/gnu/packages.scm
index 562906178..b4ac6661c 100644
--- a/gnu/packages.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages.scm
@@ -140,17 +140,19 @@ for system '~a'")
               directory))
         %load-path)))
 
-(define (fold-packages proc init)
-  "Call (PROC PACKAGE RESULT) for each available package, using INIT as
-the initial value of RESULT.  It is guaranteed to never traverse the
-same package twice."
+(define* (fold-packages proc init
+                        #:optional
+                        (modules (all-modules (%package-module-path))))
+  "Call (PROC PACKAGE RESULT) for each available package defined in one of
+MODULES, using INIT as the initial value of RESULT.  It is guaranteed to never
+traverse the same package twice."
   (fold-module-public-variables (lambda (object result)
                                   (if (and (package? object)
                                            (not (hidden-package? object)))
                                       (proc object result)
                                       result))
                                 init
-                                (all-modules (%package-module-path))))
+                                modules))
 
 (define find-packages-by-name
   (let ((packages (delay

[Message part 3 (text/plain, inline)]

?

Ludo’.

Message #11 received at 28274 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Christopher Baines <mail <at> cbaines.net>
To: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
Cc: 28274 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#28274] [PATCH] gnu: Add fold-packages-in-modules.
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2017 22:44:33 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 15:20:55 +0200
ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) wrote:

> Instead of introducing a new procedure, what about simply:
> 
> 
> diff --git a/gnu/packages.scm b/gnu/packages.scm
> index 562906178..b4ac6661c 100644
> --- a/gnu/packages.scm
> +++ b/gnu/packages.scm
> @@ -140,17 +140,19 @@ for system '~a'")
>                directory))
>          %load-path)))
>  
> -(define (fold-packages proc init)
> -  "Call (PROC PACKAGE RESULT) for each available package, using INIT
> as -the initial value of RESULT.  It is guaranteed to never traverse
> the -same package twice."
> +(define* (fold-packages proc init
> +                        #:optional
> +                        (modules (all-modules
> (%package-module-path))))
> +  "Call (PROC PACKAGE RESULT) for each available package defined in
> one of +MODULES, using INIT as the initial value of RESULT.  It is
> guaranteed to never +traverse the same package twice."
>    (fold-module-public-variables (lambda (object result)
>                                    (if (and (package? object)
>                                             (not (hidden-package?
> object))) (proc object result)
>                                        result))
>                                  init
> -                                (all-modules
> (%package-module-path))))
> +                                modules))
>  
>  (define find-packages-by-name
>    (let ((packages (delay
> 
> 
> ?

This looks great. Are you set to push it up, or shall I?

Thanks,

Chris

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #16 received at 28274-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Christopher Baines <mail <at> cbaines.net>
Cc: 28274-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#28274] [PATCH] gnu: Add fold-packages-in-modules.
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2017 11:08:56 +0200

Christopher Baines <mail <at> cbaines.net> skribis:

> On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 15:20:55 +0200
> ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) wrote:
>
>> Instead of introducing a new procedure, what about simply:
>> 
>> 
>> diff --git a/gnu/packages.scm b/gnu/packages.scm
>> index 562906178..b4ac6661c 100644
>> --- a/gnu/packages.scm
>> +++ b/gnu/packages.scm
>> @@ -140,17 +140,19 @@ for system '~a'")
>>                directory))
>>          %load-path)))
>>  
>> -(define (fold-packages proc init)
>> -  "Call (PROC PACKAGE RESULT) for each available package, using INIT
>> as -the initial value of RESULT.  It is guaranteed to never traverse
>> the -same package twice."
>> +(define* (fold-packages proc init
>> +                        #:optional
>> +                        (modules (all-modules
>> (%package-module-path))))
>> +  "Call (PROC PACKAGE RESULT) for each available package defined in
>> one of +MODULES, using INIT as the initial value of RESULT.  It is
>> guaranteed to never +traverse the same package twice."
>>    (fold-module-public-variables (lambda (object result)
>>                                    (if (and (package? object)
>>                                             (not (hidden-package?
>> object))) (proc object result)
>>                                        result))
>>                                  init
>> -                                (all-modules
>> (%package-module-path))))
>> +                                modules))
>>  
>>  (define find-packages-by-name
>>    (let ((packages (delay
>> 
>> 
>> ?
>
> This looks great. Are you set to push it up, or shall I?

Pushed, thanks!

Ludo'.

Message #19 received at 28274 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Christopher Baines <mail <at> cbaines.net>
To: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
Cc: 28274 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#28274] [PATCH] gnu: Add fold-packages-in-modules.
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2017 19:20:26 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Fri, 01 Sep 2017 11:08:56 +0200
ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) wrote:

> Christopher Baines <mail <at> cbaines.net> skribis:
> 
> > On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 15:20:55 +0200
> > ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) wrote:
> >  
> >> Instead of introducing a new procedure, what about simply:
> >> 
> >> 
> >> diff --git a/gnu/packages.scm b/gnu/packages.scm
> >> index 562906178..b4ac6661c 100644
> >> --- a/gnu/packages.scm
> >> +++ b/gnu/packages.scm
> >> @@ -140,17 +140,19 @@ for system '~a'")
> >>                directory))
> >>          %load-path)))
> >>  
> >> -(define (fold-packages proc init)
> >> -  "Call (PROC PACKAGE RESULT) for each available package, using
> >> INIT as -the initial value of RESULT.  It is guaranteed to never
> >> traverse the -same package twice."
> >> +(define* (fold-packages proc init
> >> +                        #:optional
> >> +                        (modules (all-modules
> >> (%package-module-path))))
> >> +  "Call (PROC PACKAGE RESULT) for each available package defined
> >> in one of +MODULES, using INIT as the initial value of RESULT.  It
> >> is guaranteed to never +traverse the same package twice."
> >>    (fold-module-public-variables (lambda (object result)
> >>                                    (if (and (package? object)
> >>                                             (not (hidden-package?
> >> object))) (proc object result)
> >>                                        result))
> >>                                  init
> >> -                                (all-modules
> >> (%package-module-path))))
> >> +                                modules))
> >>  
> >>  (define find-packages-by-name
> >>    (let ((packages (delay
> >> 
> >> 
> >> ?  
> >
> > This looks great. Are you set to push it up, or shall I?  
> 
> Pushed, thanks!

Awesome, thanks Ludo :)

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.