GNU bug report logs - #30657
Add support for file-like objects to the Prosody configuration

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Clément Lassieur <clement <at> lassieur.org>
Cc: 30657 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [bug#30657] [PATCH] services: messaging: Prosody config supports file-like objects.
Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2018 15:37:49 +0100

Hello,

Clément Lassieur <clement <at> lassieur.org> skribis:

> * doc/guix.texi (Messaging Services): Update accordingly.
> * gnu/services/configuration.scm (serialize-configuration,
> serialize-maybe-stem, serialize-package): Return strings or string-valued
> gexps (these procedures were only used for their side-effects).
> (file-like?): New exported procedure.
> * gnu/services/messaging.scm (serialize-field, serialize-field-list,
> enclose-quotes, serialize-raw-content, serialize-ssl-configuration,
> serialize-virtualhost-configuration-list,
> serialize-int-component-configuration-list,
> serialize-ext-component-configuration-list,
> serialize-virtualhost-configuration, serialize-int-component-configuration,
> serialize-ext-component-configuration, serialize-prosody-configuration):
> Return strings or string-valued gexps and stop printing.
> (prosody-activation): Use SERIALIZE-PROSODY-CONFIGURATION's return value with
> MIXED-TEXT-FILE instead of using its output with PLAIN-FILE.
> (serialize-non-negative-integer, serialize-non-negative-integer-list): Convert
> numbers to strings.
> (file-object?, serialize-file-object, file-object-list?,
> serialize-file-object-list): New procedures.
> (ssl-configuration)[capath, cafile], (prosody-configuration)[plugin-paths,
> groups-file]: Replace FILE-NAME with FILE-OBJECT.

[...]

> +  #~(string-append
> +     #$@(map (lambda (field)
> +               ((configuration-field-serializer field)
> +                (configuration-field-name field)
> +                ((configuration-field-getter field) config)))
> +             fields)))

Awesome, I find it clearer.  :-)

> +(define (file-like? val)
> +  (and (struct? val) ((@@ (guix gexp) lookup-compiler) val)))

I’m not fond of the idea of using @@ in real code.  :-)

Could you move ‘file-like?’ to (guix gexp), with a docstring, and with
‘->bool’ to avoid exposing internal details:

  (define (file-like? value)
    (and (struct? value) (->bool (lookup-compiler value))))

?

> +(define (file-object? val)
> +  (or (file-like? val) (file-name? val)))

Do we need this predicate?  After all, all we can say is that a file
name is necessarily a string (or a string-valued gexp), but a string is
not necessarily a file name (IOW there’s no disjoint type for file
names.)

I suppose the configuration mechanism needs it though, right?  In that
context it’s probably OK.

Apart from this the patch LGTM, thank you!

Ludo’.

Previous Next

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