On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 05:25:58PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Mathieu Lirzin <m...@gnu.org> skribis:
>
> > Leo Famulari <l...@famulari.name> writes:
> >
> >> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:53:33AM +0300, Alex Kost wrote:
> >>> Leo Famulari (2016-03-15 02:34 +0300) wrote:
> >>>
> >>> [...]
> >>> > (define-public python2-llfuse
> >>> > - (package-with-python2 python-llfuse))
> >>> > + (package (inherit (package-with-python2
> >>> > + (strip-python2-variant python-llfuse)))
> >>> > + (propagated-inputs `(("python2-contextlib2"
> >>> > ,python2-contextlib2)))))
> >>> > +
> >>> > +;; For attic@0.16
> >>> > +(define-public python-llfuse@0.41
> >>>
> >>> All our package variables use '-' to separate name and version. I think
> >>> this is good choice and we shouldn't use '@' in variable names.
> >>
> >> Okay, I replaced all use of '@' with '-'.
> >>
> >> Is the '@' syntax is only meant to be used on the command line?
> >
> > This syntax has appeared to solve some limitations in the command line
> > interface which was failing to properly match package names containing
> > numbers.
> >
> > I think it is OK to use it elsewhere as long as it does not break
> > things. However in the case of scheme variables, I think it is not a
> > good idea to use '@' because it could lead people into thinking that
> > there is a strong relation between typing ‘guix build foo@14’ and
> > defining a variable named ‘foo@14’.
>
> Furthermore ‘@’ (at sign) has a special meaning in Guile (info "(guile)
> Using Guile Modules"), so even though it’s currently valid within an
> identifier, I’d suggest avoiding it.
Thanks for the explanation everybody!
I've made all the requested changes. Any more comments on this patch
series?
>
> Ludo’.
