GNU bug report logs - #34948
[PATCH 0/3] Turn 'essential-services' into an <operating-system> field

Previous Next

Full log

Message #17 received at 34948 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 34948 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#34948] [PATCH 1/3] records: Allow thunked fields to refer to
 'this-record'.
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 22:53:07 +0100

Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> writes:

> * guix/records.scm (this-record): New syntax parameter.
> (make-syntactic-constructor)[wrap-field-value]: When F is thunked,
> return a one-argument lambda instead of a thunk, and parameterize
> THIS-RECORD.

So the value of the thunked field is no longer strictly a thunk?

I’m having difficulties understanding how this works.  Why does the
“thunked field” now require an argument (“x”)?

We use the syntax parameter “this-record” to introduce a new binding
with this name in the context of the “value” of the field.  The
parameter value is … hard to make out.  How does the syntax-case macro
in the following syntax-parameterize expression evaluate to the record
itself?  Would #,x not be sufficient to refer to the argument of the
field accessor?

>           (define (wrap-field-value f value)
>             (cond ((thunked-field? f)
> -                  #`(lambda () #,value))
> +                  #`(lambda (x)
> +                      (syntax-parameterize ((this-record
> +                                             (lambda (s)
> +                                               (syntax-case s ()
> +                                                 (id
> +                                                  (identifier? #'id)
> +                                                  #'x)))))


--
Ricardo

Previous Next

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