Hi Chris, Chris Marusich <cmmarus...@gmail.com> skribis:
> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: >> We can now avoid monadic procedures by using the declarative counterpart >> of the monadic API. That is, we could write: >> >> (define (grub-configuration-file …) ;normal proc >> (computed-file "grub.cfg" builder)) >> >> instead of: >> >> (define (grub-configuration-file …) ;monadic proc >> (gexp->derivation "grub.cfg" builder)) >> >> I would welcome such changes. >> > > That's an interesting idea. However, in this case, I think we need to > pass the build options (from the parsed command-line arguments) along > somehow. How should we set the build options when using the declarative > 'computed-file' procedure? It seems like the most obvious way would be > to pass the build options in as arguments to the 'computed-file' > procedure, but is there a better way? Which build options? There’s a direct correspondence between, say, ‘gexp->derivation’ and ‘computed-file’ and the arguments are essentially the same. Unless I’m overlooking something (again!), the change I suggest above is a mechanical change. HTH, Ludo’.