[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#56799: (gnu services configuration) usage of *unspecified* is proble
From: |
Attila Lendvai |
Subject: |
bug#56799: (gnu services configuration) usage of *unspecified* is problematic |
Date: |
Wed, 27 Jul 2022 18:27:13 +0000 |
hi,
sorry for the headaches!
the original discussion is here (well, i think. site is down right now):
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/54674
'UNSPECIFIED would satisfy SYMBOL?, i.e. a source of headaches/confusion. it
used to be 'DISABLED, which was even worse as it can be confused/conflated with
a user specified value.
i suggested the use of srfi-189, but it was rejected as unwelcome complexity.
https://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-189/srfi-189.html
i think it makes sense to change Guile to make *unspecified* self-evaluating,
but looking back, maybe the use of srfi-189 would have been better.
i need to run now, and i'll be offline for a week or two. i can't look the
example in depth now, but my gut instinct says that it's a bug if *unspecified*
reaches any GExp machinery.
more later,
--
• attila lendvai
• PGP: 963F 5D5F 45C7 DFCD 0A39
--
“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the
oppressor.”
— Desmond Tutu (1931–)
- bug#56799: (gnu services configuration) usage of *unspecified* is problematic, Maxim Cournoyer, 2022/07/27
- bug#56799: (gnu services configuration) usage of *unspecified* is problematic, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, 2022/07/27
- bug#56799: (gnu services configuration) usage of *unspecified* is problematic,
Attila Lendvai <=
- bug#56799: (gnu services configuration) usage of *unspecified* is problematic, Maxim Cournoyer, 2022/07/27
- bug#56799: (gnu services configuration) usage of *unspecified* is problematic, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, 2022/07/27
- bug#56799: (gnu services configuration) usage of *unspecified* is problematic, Maxim Cournoyer, 2022/07/27
- bug#56799: [PATCH] services: configuration: Step back from *unspecified*., Maxim Cournoyer, 2022/07/27
- bug#56799: (gnu services configuration) usage of *unspecified* is problematic, Maxim Cournoyer, 2022/07/27
- bug#56799: [PATCH v2] gexp: Handle *unspecified* as a gexp input., Maxim Cournoyer, 2022/07/27
- bug#56799: [PATCH v2] gexp: Handle *unspecified* as a gexp input., Maxime Devos, 2022/07/27
- bug#56799: [PATCH v2] gexp: Handle *unspecified* as a gexp input., Maxim Cournoyer, 2022/07/28
- bug#56799: [PATCH v3] gexp: Handle *unspecified* as a gexp input., Maxim Cournoyer, 2022/07/28