[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add sendmail
From: |
Alex Vong |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add sendmail |
Date: |
Sat, 24 Sep 2016 16:22:09 +0800 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) |
Alex Kost <address@hidden> writes:
> John Darrington (2016-09-17 12:11 +0200) wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 05:38:26PM +0800, Alex Vong wrote:
> [...]
>> > > + "contrib/mmuegel" "devtools/bin/configure.sh")
>> > > + (("/bin/sh") (which "bash")))
>> > > +
>> > > + (substitute* "devtools/bin/Build"
>> > > + (("SHELL=/bin/sh") (string-append "SHELL=" (which "bash"))))
>> > > + #t))
>> > I think the `#t' is not neccessary here, since `substitute*' uses
>> > `substitute', which will either return #t or throw an exception.
>> >
>> > WTF?? Didn't you complain earlier this week when I *didn't* put #t in
>> > exactly this
>> > scenario??
>> >
>> Yes, I am a different Alex :)
>> Also, it seems we are not being consistent here, sometimes we put `#t'
>> after `substitute*', sometimes we don't. Anyone has an idea?
>>
>> I did raise some suggestions in my earlier posts. But again I don't
>> have any strong
>> opinion.
>
> I have a strong opinion: if a docstring of a procedure says what value
> it returns, we can rely on it, otherwise we should not guess what value
> will be returned. In case of 'substitute*' (and 'substitute'), the
> returned value is not specified, so I think if a phase ends with
> 'substitute*', we should (or even must) add #t after it.
I see your point that one should not be relying on undocumented
features, which I agree. But I also see an alternative: to make
'substitute*' either return true or throw an exception and document
it. I think the heart of the problem is scheme is "untyped", so we rely
on the documentation. What do you think?
- [PATCH] gnu: Add sendmail, John Darrington, 2016/09/16
- Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add sendmail, Alex Vong, 2016/09/17
- Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add sendmail, John Darrington, 2016/09/17
- Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add sendmail, John Darrington, 2016/09/17
- Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add sendmail, Alex Vong, 2016/09/17
- Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add sendmail, John Darrington, 2016/09/17
- Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add sendmail, Alex Kost, 2016/09/18
- Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add sendmail,
Alex Vong <=
- Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add sendmail, Alex Kost, 2016/09/24