Hello,
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> Hi,
>
> Simon Tournier skribis:
>
>> On Mon, 06 Mar 2023 at 17:56, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>>> Maxim Cournoyer skribis:
>>>
Thanks for the feedback. I wonder if some are of the opinion that since
gexp->derivation is a plain function rather than a syn
Hi,
Simon Tournier skribis:
> On Mon, 06 Mar 2023 at 17:56, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Maxim Cournoyer skribis:
>>
>>> Thanks for the feedback. I wonder if some are of the opinion that since
>>> gexp->derivation is a plain function rather than a syntax having a
>>> special form for its 2nd arg
Hi Simon,
Simon Tournier writes:
> Hi Maxim,
>
> On Tue, 07 Mar 2023 at 11:54, Maxim Cournoyer
> 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 mes
Hi Maxim,
On Tue, 07 Mar 2023 at 11:54, Maxim Cournoyer 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/arch
Hi Simon,
Simon Tournier writes:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 06 Mar 2023 at 17:56, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Maxim Cournoyer skribis:
>>
>>> Thanks for the feedback. I wonder if some are of the opinion that since
>>> gexp->derivation is a plain function rather than a syntax having a
>>> special form fo
Hi,
On Mon, 06 Mar 2023 at 17:56, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Maxim Cournoyer skribis:
>
>> Thanks for the feedback. I wonder if some are of the opinion that since
>> gexp->derivation is a plain function rather than a syntax having a
>> special form for its 2nd argument, we should leave the defaul
Hi,
Maxim Cournoyer skribis:
> Thanks for the feedback. I wonder if some are of the opinion that since
> gexp->derivation is a plain function rather than a syntax having a
> special form for its 2nd argument, we should leave the default
> indentation rules untouched for it?
Yes, that’s my take
Hi Efraim,
Efraim Flashner writes:
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 05:20:55PM -0500, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
>> -CC bug#61255
>> +CC guix-devel
>>
>> Hi Ludovic and guix-devel readers,
>>
>> Ludovic Courtès writes:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Maxim Cournoyer skribis:
>> >
>> >> Ludovic Courtès writes:
On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 05:20:55PM -0500, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
> -CC bug#61255
> +CC guix-devel
>
> Hi Ludovic and guix-devel readers,
>
> Ludovic Courtès writes:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Maxim Cournoyer skribis:
> >
> >> Ludovic Courtès writes:
> >>
>
> [...]
>
> >>> I’m not convinced by the in
-CC bug#61255
+CC guix-devel
Hi Ludovic and guix-devel readers,
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> Hi,
>
> Maxim Cournoyer skribis:
>
>> Ludovic Courtès writes:
>>
[...]
>>> I’m not convinced by the indentation rule for ‘gexp->derivation’ added
>>> in 82daab42811a2e3c7684ebdf12af75ff0fa67b99: there’
10 matches
Mail list logo