Subject: bug#35846: closed (Re: [bug#35812] [PATCH] fix hackage cabal tests)

From: [email-masked] (GNU bug Tracking System)
Date: Sun, 26 May 2019 21:24:02 +0000

Your bug report

#35812: [PATCH] guix/import/cabal: handle braced descriptions (fixes #35735)

which was filed against the guix-patches package, has been closed.

The explanation is attached below, along with your original report.
If you require more details, please reply to [email-masked].

-- 
35812: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=35812
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact [email-masked] with problems

Subject: Re: [bug#35812] [PATCH] fix hackage cabal tests
From: Ludovic Courtès <[email-masked]>
To: Robert Vollmert <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 26 May 2019 23:23:27 +0200
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>

Hi,

Robert Vollmert <[email-masked]> skribis:

>> On 21. May 2019, at 16:48, Ludovic Courtès <[email-masked]> wrote:
>> Robert Vollmert <[email-masked]> skribis:
>> 
>>> Hackage cabal tests didn’t run independently due to memoization,
>>> and test-cabal-6 was failing.
>> 
>> I don’t think memoization can get in the way here: the argument list is
>> used as a key in the memoization hash table.  Thus, if you pass
>> different arguments, you get a cache miss and call the underlying
>> procedure.
>> 
>> Or am I missing something?
>
> I agree that memoization of a pure function shouldn’t have such effects,
> but my (limited) understanding is that hackage->guix-packages would
> cache import results by package name on the assumption that cabal
> files for the same package name don’t change between calls.

Oh, got it.

I pushed a variant of the patch as commit
ad7466aafd7f166d0b6be5eb32dda1d3ee8a6445.

Thanks!

Ludo’.

Subject: [PATCH] guix/import/cabal: handle braced descriptions (fixes #35735)
From: Robert Vollmert <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 21 May 2019 15:55:03 +0200
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>

This fixes the cabal importer to deal with braced instead of layouted
properties. This is based on the current approach of lexing a whole
property as a token; it feels not ideal, but I’m not fluent enough in
guile (or the cabal format) to do better.

Compare https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=35735