Andreas Enge <[email protected]> skribis: > On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 04:03:23PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> Andreas Enge <[email protected]> skribis: >> separate ‘package-with-name-prefix’ procedure, such that we would do: >> (define package-with-python-2 >> (compose (cut package-with-name-prefix <> "python2-") >> (cut package-with-explicit-python <> python-2))) >> WDYT? > > I think one function is enough; there is not much benefit in striving > for maximal generality here, since these two operations should always > be linked in our context.
Yeah, right. >> (I would use an internal ‘define’ like this, rather than ‘let’, to >> introduce the ‘rewrite’ procedure; that doesn’t change the semantics, >> but I find it easier to read.) > > Ah, but that is less functional, no? ;-) No; internal ‘define’ is just syntactic sugar equivalent to ‘letrec*’. > Thanks for the other suggestions, which look quite interesting. The current > solution looks easier to a Scheme neophyte like me, and as there is no major > objection, I am going to push the patch as it is. > > This will allow us to go forward with the other problems in the python build > system, and hopefully package a few more modules! Excellent, thanks! Ludo’.
