GNU bug report logs - #51838
[PATCH 00/11] guix: node-build-system: Support compiling add-ons with node-gyp.

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Philip McGrath <philip <at> philipmcgrath.com>
To: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com>, Timothy Sample <samplet <at> ngyro.com>
Cc: 51838 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Pierre Langlois <pierre.langlois <at> gmx.com>, Jelle Licht <jlicht <at> fsfe.org>
Subject: [bug#51838] [PATCH v5 07/45] guix: node-build-system: Add #:absent-dependencies argument.
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2021 00:19:57 -0500

On 12/21/21 15:44, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote:
> Am Dienstag, dem 21.12.2021 um 13:25 -0500 schrieb Philip McGrath:
>> Here are, to the best of my understanding, the differences in
>> representation among (guix build json) and the three versions of
>> guile-json packaged in Guix.
> I think the main difference between (guix build json) and guile-json
> here are the extended keys in the latter (guix only has strings) and
> the vector/object distinction.

For guile-json-4, the representation of the JSON value "null" is also 
different: #nil vs. the symbol 'null.

> I think it'd be rather straight-forward
> to write upgrade guidelines in case we ever make the switch.
> Similarly, all rules based on pattern-matching *will break*, forcing us
> to upgrade all the recipes with it.  WDYT?  Would that be manageable
> (assuming the change to require Guile-JSON would already be core-
> updates material)?
> 

I actually might like (guix build json) better than guile-json-*! Using 
vectors for arrays seems roughly awkward as tagged alists, especially if 
Guile really doesn't have purely functional update procedures for 
alists---and I sure can't find any---so we'd have to write a little 
algebra of operations on JSON objects either way. But I'm not really 
familiar with the pros and cons of each, and I don't know the context 
behind the previous attempt to switch.

My concern is that someone, or several someones, probably should know 
all of that context before exposing one representation or another as 
part of node-build-system's API. As I've said, I think that's a 
high-priority improvement! But it, and designing nice helper functions, 
seem quite far removed from the core purpose of this patch series. Since 
IMO #:absent-dependencies would still be The Right Thing even if those 
utilities already existed, and since #:absent-dependencies can be 
implemented without having to resolve any of the broader questions, I 
think it would be better not to entangle them with this patch series.

Would it mitigate your concerns with #:absent-dependencies at all if I 
send a separate patch series adding more general utilities based on 
(guix build json)?

-Philip

Previous Next

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