GNU bug report logs - #68412
[PATCH] scripts: edit: Accept generic formatting parameter.

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
To: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com>, 68412 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Subject: [bug#68412] [PATCH v2] scripts: edit: Accept generic formatting parameter.
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 12:10:54 +0100

Hi,

On sam., 13 janv. 2024 at 00:35, Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com> wrote:

> +@vindex GUIX_EDITOR_LOCATION_FORMAT
> +The default convention used by @code{guix edit} when invoking
> +@code{$EDITOR} is to pass it @code{+@var{line} @var{file}} to open
> +@var{file} at the given @var{line}.
> +You can change this convention for editors that do not support it
> +by setting @env{GUIX_EDITOR_LOCATION_FORMAT}.
> +For instance, to set things up with kate, use:
> +
> +@example
> +export VISUAL=kate
> +export GUIX_EDITOR_LOCATION_FORMAT='--line=$@{LINE@} $@{FILE@}'
> +# Assume you want to hack on kate
> +guix edit kate
> +@end example

First, it appears to me inconsistent to speak about EDITOR and then to
use VISUAL in the example.  I suggest to have:

    The default convention used by @code{guix edit} when invoking
    @code{$EDITOR} or @code{VISUAL} is to pass it @code{+@var{line} @var{file}} to open

and the same example.  Or change the example and replace with:

    export EDITOR=kate
    export GUIX_EDITOR_LOCATION_FORMAT='--line=$@{LINE@} $@{FILE@}'


Second, I think that using markers that can be interpreted by Bash shell
can lead to confusion.  For instance,

    $ LINE=foo; FILE=bar # somewhere in my config for whatever reasons

then:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
$ export GUIX_EDITOR_LOCATION_FORMAT='--line=${LINE} ${FILE}'
$ echo $GUIX_EDITOR_LOCATION_FORMAT
--line=${LINE} ${FILE}

$ export GUIX_EDITOR_LOCATION_FORMAT="--line=${LINE} ${FILE}"
$ echo $GUIX_EDITOR_LOCATION_FORMAT
--line=foo bar
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

Well, simple quote versus double quote appears to me subtle.


Since it is an hard text replacement, why not remove $ and just have the
placeholder {LINE} or {FILE}?  Or <LINE> and <FILE>?  Or whatever that
is not interpreted by common shells.


> +Note, that Guix only matches the literal strings @code{$@{LINE@}} and
> +@code{$@{FILE@}} here.  These may look like shell parameters, but their
> +short form is currently not supported.

Therefore, it would make that more clear or even obsolete.


Cheers,
simon

Previous Next

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