GNU bug report logs - #70800
[PATCH] scripts: style: Add 'order' option to alphabetically order file.

Previous Next

Full log

Message #11 received at 70800 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, Herman Rimm
 <herman <at> rimm.ee>
Cc: 70800 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Josselin Poiret <dev <at> jpoiret.xyz>,
 Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe <at> gnu.org>, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me <at> tobias.gr>,
 Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>, Christopher Baines <guix <at> cbaines.net>
Subject: Re: [bug#70800] [PATCH] scripts: style: Add 'order' option to
 alphabetically order file.
Date: Fri, 31 May 2024 17:36:09 +0200

Hi,

On Sat, 25 May 2024 at 16:14, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> wrote:

>> I managed to create a procedure which alphabetically sorts top-level
>> package definitions.  Sort is not stable as I understand it, so versions
>> of packages get swapped.  It works well enough in small package modules,
>> and should not be a problem once package versions are used in sorting.
>
> Maybe use ‘stable-sort’ instead of ‘sort’?

[...]

>> +         (lst (sort lst (lambda (lst1 lst2)
>> +                          (let ((name1 (package-name lst1))
>> +                                (name2 (package-name lst2)))
>> +                            (and name1 name2 (string> name1 name2)))))))
>> +    (reverse (concatenate lst))))
>
> Maybe replace ‘string>’ by ‘string<?’ and drop ‘reverse’.

I would suggest to use ’sort!’ for an in-place sort.  This would avoid
some GC cycles when internally copying since ’lst’ is inside ’let*’.

Moreover, yeah reverse the inequality would avoid the ’reverse’
call. :-)

About the stability, I would suggest something as:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(sort! lst (lambda (lst1 lst2)
             (let ((name1 (package-name lst1))
                   (name2 (package-name lst2)))
               (and name1 name2 (or (string<? name1 name2)
                                    (eq? '< (version-compare
                                             (package-version lst1)
                                             (package-version lst2))))))))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

with ’version-compare’ from (guix utils).  Well, something like
that. :-)


Cheers,
simon

Previous Next

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