Hi Maxim, On Tue, 07 Mar 2023 at 11:54, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.courno...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> For what it is worth, I do not see an high difference between the both >> indentations. So, my opinion would to keep the current practise. > > Please take a look at my original message in this thread, > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2023-02/msg00297.html, > where I gave examples of gexp->derivation indentations that should > explain the rationale allow nesting arguments more naturally, as if > gexp->derivation was a special form (although it's a simple procedure). Yeah, I have read this rationale before. :-) My question was somehow directed to Ludo: > Yes, that’s my take and current practice so far: special rules for > special forms (macros), not for procedures. What is the rationale? Being able to know directly at the location when it is a plain function or a special form? Sorry for having been unclear. And I do not see a big difference between, (gexp->derivation "check-deb-pack" (with-imported-modules '((guix build utils)) or (gexp->derivation "check-deb-pack" (with-imported-modules '((guix build utils)) It is somehow personal cosmetic and I am sometimes poor person about cosmetic. ;-) Well, from my point of view, based on consistency with current practises, I would be inclined to keep the status quo: special rule for special form. Cheers, simon
