Luciana Lima Brito <lubr...@posteo.net> writes: > On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 14:11:37 +0100 > Christopher Baines <m...@cbaines.net> wrote: > > Hi, > >> I think that's better, but you're still taking the matched-outputs, >> matched-inputs and matched-sources alists, then later making the >> values vectors rather than lists. The code would be even simpler if >> you converted to a vector just after the map that produces the >> relevant lists. >> >> I haven't looked to closely at the rest, but it looks like the >> environment-variables binding is unnecessary, given how simple the bit >> of code used is, it can just be inlined in the one place where the >> binding is used. > > Done! :) > I even simplified some other stuff, based on what you said.
Great, I think that looks much simpler. Some more things to think about: - Variable naming, what does the "matched" in matched outputs mean? (same goes for the other "matched" things) - (if (null? ...), I'm unsure if all of those checks are necessary, I believe some fields at least will never be "null?". - Builder and arguments grouping, I think this makes sense on the HTML page, as they're connected, but does it make sense in the JSON? I think you're getting close to something that's ready to merge though. Chris
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
