GNU bug report logs - #66801
[PATCH] mix-build-system: draft 1

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com>
To: Pierre-Henry Fröhring <phfrohring <at> deeplinks.com>,  66801 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [bug#66801] ['PATCH v2' 01/14] build-system: Add mix-build-system.
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2023 18:53:22 +0100

Am Dienstag, dem 14.11.2023 um 11:37 +0100 schrieb Pierre-Henry
Fröhring:
> > > +(define-module (guix build-system mix)
> > > +  #:use-module (gnu packages base)
> > > +  #:use-module (gnu packages elixir)
> > > +  #:use-module (gnu packages elixir-xyz)
> > > +  #:use-module (gnu packages erlang)
> > You probably want to resolve those imports rather than use-modules
> > them.
> 
> You mean something like this?
> #+begin_src scheme
> (define-module (guix build-system mix)
>   #:use-module ((gnu packages base) #:select (glibc make-glibc-utf8-
> locales))
>   #:use-module ((gnu packages elixir) #:select (elixir elixir-hex))
>   #:use-module ((gnu packages erlang) #:select (rebar3))
> #+end_src
> 
> I have moved `elixir-hex' to elixir.scm to avoid a circular
> dependency.
No.  Look at all the other build systems.  None of them use submodules
of (gnu packages), for a good reason.

> > > +(define (input=? input1 input2)
> > > +  "Tell whether inputs INPUT1 and INPUT2 are equal."
> > > +  (define pkg1 (match input1 ((_ pkg) pkg)))
> > > +  (define pkg2 (match input2 ((_ pkg) pkg)))
> > > +  (string=? (package-name pkg1) (package-name pkg2)))
> > Again, checking for label equivalence is a bad idea.
> 
> OK, after reading a bit more about Guile, I understand that `equal?'
> is what should be used here, right?  The intent is to remove
> duplicated inputs in the code below:
> 
> #+begin_src scheme
> (define all-propagated-inputs
>     ((compose
>       (cut delete-duplicates <> equal?) ;<-- Here
>       (cut filter erlang-or-elixir-input? <>)
>       (cut append-map package-transitive-propagated-inputs <>)
>       (cut map cadr <>))
>      (append inputs native-inputs)))
> #+end_src
Yep, that would work.  Note that delete-duplicates is O(n^2), though. 
We have a little bit of code where it's done in (I assume) O(n*log(n))
with vhashes.

> 
> > > +(define (elixir-input? X.Y input)
> > > +  "Determines if the given INPUT is an Elixir input."
> > > +  (match input
> > > +    ((label . path)
> > > +     ;; XXX: The second condition may be enough.
> > > +     (and (elixir-name? label)
> > > +          (directory-exists? (path->elixir-lib path X.Y))))))
> > Ahem, search-path-as-list.
> > Also, leaking the version is kinda bad, API-wise.
> 
> Does this mean that build artifacts should be installed under
> `$out/lib/elixir/$libname` instead of `$out/lib/elixir/X.Y/$libname`?
Not necessarily, but you want a different way of building
$out/lib/elixir/X.Y/ that doesn't leak through the function signature.

Btw. I think that you're resolving transitive inputs twice; once on the
build system code and once by fattening the outputs.  You probably only
need either of those, not both.

Cheers

Previous Next

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